Another Free Will topic

I came in late, and the other thread had slid from the subject (as they all do in time), so I’m making my own.

I would like to pose a question: Do we, as humans, have the right to demand free will? Are we justified in this?

My answer would be no. I feel that free will is a man-made concept that humans came up with to make themselves feel more important. I would also point to physics to defend the fact of no free will. If there were free will, then results would not necessary be dependant on the state of things in an event. For one to thing that the same thing happening the same way several times with different results is a classic deffinition of insanity. Since in nature actions happen that give a determinable result, free will would somewhat violate nature.

I know this is a loose arguement, but I like it :smiley:

Yeah. Free will is just the power to come up with silly concepts like free will all by ourselves, and what gives us the right? What makes us so damned self-important that we can think up things like the freedom to think up things just to make us feel even more important, anyway? I demand the freedom to reject the idea of having this freedom, and am compelled by the simple physics of the universe to raise my voice in protest of my ability to choose to protest. Who the hell is in charge here anyway? Not me, I say, since my protest is already in the grand plan of determined behavior, and I have no choice in the matter. I am just an object of the natural world, and if I raise my arm nine times and throw a perfect strike right down the center of the plate, then there is no possibility that the tenth time I raise my arm I might bean the damned idiot just behind the dugout who has been shouting his head off for three innings. That would not only violate physics, but it would piss off Saint Augustine, since beaning the fool wouldn’t be much of a moral act, and so I’d have two strikes against me already, which wouldn’t really be in my best interest. So then I’m Locke’d into the freedom to will rather than the freedom of will, which is probably okay, since it sort of violates nature that I’m here to begin with, what with my parents having had no choice except to follow the dictates of a random universe and all, so my responsibility here is severely limited, and if you dare to doubt that then just who the hell is forcing you to doubt me? You think you have a choice? HAH! You think YOU are free to decide? Let us exHume your assumptions then, and examine the motives that you cannot have chosen, and which will make no worthwhile difference in any event. Difference, you ask? HAH! You Kant be indifferent. It is against the rules. Phenomenally, my freedom to question your freedom to question my ability to question traps you in time, subject to the laws of physics, which everyone knows are immutably Machiavellian, putting quite the Buridan on your ass to Stoicly Cleanthes your thinking. It is downright Lucretius to think that you are allowed to think. So stop it.
I know this is a booze argument, but I like it.