Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Free will in antiquity is a philosophical and theological concept. Free will in antiquity was not discussed in the same terms as used in the modern free will debates, but historians of the problem have speculated who exactly was first to take positions as determinist, libertarian, and compatibilist in antiquity. [1]
Although many interpret this work as a blow against the argument for free will, both psychologists [203] [204] and philosophers [205] [206] have criticized Wegner's theories. Emily Pronin has argued that the subjective experience of free will is supported by the introspection illusion. This is the tendency for people to trust the reliability of ...
Free will argument for the nonexistence of God [ edit ] Dan Barker suggests that this can lead to a "Free will Argument for the Nonexistence of God" [ 8 ] on the grounds that God's omniscience is incompatible with God having free will and that if God does not have free will, God is not a personal being .
What exactly al-Farabi posited on the question of future contingents is contentious. Nicholas Rescher argues that al-Farabi's position is that the truth value of future contingents is already distributed in an "indefinite way", whereas Fritz Zimmerman argues that al-Farabi endorsed Aristotle's solution that the truth value of future contingents has not been distributed yet. [3]
Free will in theology is an important part of the debate on free will in general. Religions vary greatly in their response to the standard argument against free will and thus might appeal to any number of responses to the paradox of free will, the claim that omniscience and free will are incompatible.
It's increasingly popular to believe that humans are merely machines and therefore can't control their behavior. But biology doesn't let us off the hook.
Spinoza argues that seemingly "free" actions aren't actually free, or that the entire concept is a chimera because "internal" beliefs are necessarily caused by earlier external events. The appearance of the internal is a mistake rooted in ignorance of causes, not in an actual volition, and therefore the will is always determined.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people ...