# Brushes with the divine? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 9, 2013, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585 "2013-06-09T21:12:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 27
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/521 "2013-06-24T14:16:46Z")
> [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](#): > > Oh, I can see where you’d find the third boring, as it is the most critical of Harris’s approach to the subject. The fact that he finds Free Will too vague a concept to define, then continues to use it throughout the book, is suspect: it’s patently easy to disagree with something that you don’t bother to explain. I think definition 2 works really well. free will noun 1. free and independent choice; voluntary decision: You took on the responsibility of your own free will. 2. Philosophy . the doctrine that the conduct of human beings expresses personal choice and is not simply determined by physical or divine forces. [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/free+will?s=t](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/free+will?s=t) How’s that? > [@](#): > > As Harris states, this book is part of a continuing discussion he’s been having with others, most notably Dennett. I dislike coming into the middle of a discussion and making decisions not based on all available facts, so I’m going to trace this back to at least Dennett’s prior discussion. Have you read Dennett? I read Dennett’s first book “Elbow Room” and thought it was easy to follow and made a really good case against free will, and I wondered why Dennett didn’t just accept it. I read the first 3rd or so of his next book “Freedom Evolves” and thought it both boring and sketchy so I moved on to other things (life is short you know). How much Dennett have you read? ---
**Author:** ![Prof.Pepperwinkle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/prof.pepperwinkle/32/13627_2.png) [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Prof.Pepperwinkle)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/522 "2013-06-24T14:21:32Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > I think definition 2 works really well. > > free will > noun > > 1. free and independent choice; voluntary decision: You took on the responsibility of your own free will. > 2. Philosophy . the doctrine that the conduct of human beings expresses personal choice and is not simply determined by physical or divine forces. > > [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/free+will?s=t](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/free+will?s=t) > > How’s that? Quite acceptable. So why didn’t Harris use it? > [@](#): > > I read Dennett’s first book “Elbow Room” and thought it was easy to follow and made a really good case against free will, and I wondered why Dennett didn’t just accept it. I read the first 3rd or so of his next book “Freedom Evolves” and thought it both boring and sketchy so I moved on to other things (life is short you know). How much Dennett have you read? None. That’s why I said I was going to. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/523 "2013-06-24T14:21:57Z")
> [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](#): > > Sure, but what would be the point? To show you have good answers. I understand if you do not, in fact I’m pretty sure you do not. > [@](#): > > When huck asked you why you attacked her ideas, you replied because it was easy. When she asked why you think Christianity is bad, you did not even bother to quote or paraphrase from Harris’s “A Letter to a Christian Nation”, but blew her off. Why quote from that book? I hardly remember it. I already said why I think liberal Christianity is bad. It’s ignorance itself, and it promotes faith and Christianity as virtuous both of which help to prop up fundamentalist Christianity which is even more ignorant, though I admit less hypocritical. > [@](#): > > It’s not that I can’t answer, it’s that the whole process has become obviously pointless. Sure. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/524 "2013-06-24T14:24:49Z")
> [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](#): > > Quite acceptable. So why didn’t Harris use it? Not sure, I’m not him. > [@](#): > > None. That’s why I said I was going to. What did you think of the Voltaire chapters? Any criticisms or did he make sense? ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/525 "2013-06-24T14:32:37Z")
> [@](#): > > **Kable** : Your notions all seem “Christian friendly” in one way or another, though I must say, are not particularly Christ like. What do you mean when you say that something is “not particularly Christ-like”? ---
**Author:** ![Prof.Pepperwinkle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/prof.pepperwinkle/32/13627_2.png) [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Prof.Pepperwinkle)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/526 "2013-06-24T14:35:59Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > Not sure, I’m not him. Fair enough. > [@](#): > > What did you think of the Voltaire chapters? Any criticisms or did he make sense? To be certain we’re on the same page, we are talking about [this entry](http://history.hanover.edu/texts/voltaire/volfrewi.html), right? If so, you can see he’s deferring to Locke’s “Essay on the Human Understanding” and its chapter on Power, and says that “A free will is an expression absolutely void of sense” which is again refusing to define the term. So, let’s move onto Locke. Have you read Locke? ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/527 "2013-06-24T14:45:14Z")
> [@Zoe](#): > > What do you mean when you say that something is “not particularly Christ-like”? Following the teachings of Jesus, as written in the Gospels. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/528 "2013-06-24T14:50:32Z")
> [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](#): > > To be certain we’re on the same page, we are talking about [this entry](http://history.hanover.edu/texts/voltaire/volfrewi.html), right? No, the Chapters I posted in message #466. > [@](#): > > If so, you can see he’s deferring to Locke’s “Essay on the Human Understanding” and its chapter on Power, and says that “A free will is an expression absolutely void of sense” which is again refusing to define the term. > > So, let’s move onto Locke. Have you read Locke? No, I think it’s on my bookshelf but fate has not determined that I read it yet, but as I say, that’s not the Voltaire chapters I cited. Do you have any criticism’s of the chapters I really cited? ---
**Author:** ![Prof.Pepperwinkle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/prof.pepperwinkle/32/13627_2.png) [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Prof.Pepperwinkle)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/529 "2013-06-24T14:53:50Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > No, the Chapters I posted in message #466. > > Ah, well, that’s why I asked. > > No, I think it’s on my bookshelf but fate has not determined that I read it yet, but as I say, that’s not the Voltaire chapters I cited. Do you have any criticism’s of the chapters I really cited? Clicking on the links I get the computer message that the pages aren’t available. I’ll try again tonight from my home computer. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/530 "2013-06-24T14:57:32Z")
> [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](#): > > Daniel Dennett and others feel that there as a central “you” (not necessarily a soul, but a distinct persona) that ultimately guides these stimuli. Dennett is [the **last** person](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_Drafts_Model) who would advocate the idea of a central “you”. ---
**Author:** ![Prof.Pepperwinkle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/prof.pepperwinkle/32/13627_2.png) [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Prof.Pepperwinkle)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/531 "2013-06-24T15:01:55Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Dennett is [the **last** person](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_Drafts_Model) who would advocate the idea of a central “you”. Perhaps I misunderstood Harris. I’ll go back and reread that part. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2013, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/532 "2013-06-24T15:08:39Z")
> [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](#): > > Clicking on the links I get the computer message that the pages aren’t available. I’ll try again tonight from my home computer. The links work for me. You are looking for the chapters “Destiny” and “Liberty” which is some books are out of order because the Philosophical Dictionary was originally written in French. In the meantime maybe you could think of some things people do that are not resultant on physical or divine forces. Perhaps something you have done that did not result from some combination of biology and environment or was not predestined by some all powerful and all knowing God. ---
**Author:** ![Prof.Pepperwinkle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/prof.pepperwinkle/32/13627_2.png) [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Prof.Pepperwinkle)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2013, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/533 "2013-06-25T01:22:04Z")
I won’t be able to get to this tonight. A friend of mine that I’ve known for nearly 40 years died today, and we’re helping her husband (who is in his late 70s) to help get ready for incoming family and friends, the funeral, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Neodymium\_Lover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/7993a0/32.png) [@Neodymium\_Lover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neodymium_Lover)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2013, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/534 "2013-06-25T01:53:08Z")
One time after school (eleventh grade) I was getting into my friend’s car to go hang out for a while. My mother called me and asked me to go pick up my sister. I complied. Later that day I was notified that my friends got into a wreck. All except for one was dead; the one who didn’t die is still in a coma (it’s been almost three months). I had ridden with those friends hundreds of times before. They were all good people. Not into drugs, didn’t screw with the driver, wore seatbelts, et cetera. And my mother had never called me at school with a request like that before. If I were to call any event in my life “divine intervention”, that would be it. ---
**Author:** ![Neodymium\_Lover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/7993a0/32.png) [@Neodymium\_Lover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neodymium_Lover)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2013, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/535 "2013-06-25T02:19:54Z")
> [@Prof.Pepperwinkle](#): > > The basic idea he expresses, as I understand it, is that Free Will is an illusion because at a very basic neurological (or even more primal) level, we are presented with stimuli that guide our every choice. > > An example (mine, not Mr. Harris’s): > If you are snack hungry and go to a vending machine for a candy bar, you will be provided with perhaps eight choices. Without consciously thinking about it, your memory may tell you that three of those you don’t really care for, and that you already had an Almond Joy once today, and so your taste for that has been satisfied, especially since there are still four other possibles. Again unconsciously, part of your brain remembers that when a woman you carpool with got in the car this morning, and noted that she had a Snickers in her purse, and that, coupled perhaps by the fact that you saw a Snickers commercial last night, causes you to unconsciously punch F-4, and get the Snickers. Or any number of other similar permutations. No matter how you define free will… how is that not it? Your brain reviews data and then makes a decision without the influence of another sentient force. What definition of “free will” excludes that circumstance? “_You do not have free will because you do not make your own decisions. Your brain does._” A person’s identity is contained within the brain. The rest of the body is nothing but a collection of tools used to carry out the will of the brain. This makes no sense to me. (I kind of jumped in at page 11… maybe I’m missing something here.) ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2013, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/536 "2013-06-25T02:37:01Z")
> [@Neodymium\_Lover](#): > > One time after school (eleventh grade) I was getting into my friend’s car to go hang out for a while. My mother called me and asked me to go pick up my sister. I complied. > > Later that day I was notified that my friends got into a wreck. All except for one was dead; the one who didn’t die is still in a coma (it’s been almost three months). > > I had ridden with those friends hundreds of times before. They were all good people. Not into drugs, didn’t screw with the driver, wore seatbelts, et cetera. > > And my mother had never called me at school with a request like that before. > > If I were to call any event in my life “divine intervention”, that would be it. God kills a bunch of your friends “good people” and that’s divine intervention? ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2013, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/537 "2013-06-25T02:51:24Z")
> [@Neodymium\_Lover](#): > > No matter how you define free will… how is that not it? > > Your brain reviews data and then makes a decision without the influence of another sentient force. What definition of “free will” excludes that circumstance? If your actions are foreseen by some all knowing being such that you are powerless to do anything other than what you did, your will is not free will. If your actions are controlled by some all powerful being who controls everything, your will is not free will. If your brain acts in its perceived best interest based entirely on it’s biology and it’s interaction with the environment (what else is there?) such that it it would do no other, your will is not free. “Men think themselves free because they are conscious of their volitions and desires, but are ignorant of the causes by which they are led to wish and desire.” Spinoza ---
**Author:** ![Neodymium\_Lover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/7993a0/32.png) [@Neodymium\_Lover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neodymium_Lover)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2013, 3:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/538 "2013-06-25T03:48:22Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > If your brain acts in its perceived best interest based entirely on it’s biology and it’s interaction with the environment (what else is there?) such that it it would do no other, your will is not free. What would you call a “free will”, then? Total randomness with no reason or patterns involved whatsoever? ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2013, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/539 "2013-06-25T04:27:22Z")
> [@Neodymium\_Lover](#): > > What would you call a “free will”, then? Total randomness with no reason or patterns involved whatsoever? The ability to express personal choice that is not simply determined by physical or divine forces. ---
**Author:** ![Neodymium\_Lover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/7993a0/32.png) [@Neodymium\_Lover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neodymium_Lover)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2013, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585/540 "2013-06-25T05:58:16Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > The ability to express personal choice that is not simply determined by physical or divine forces. So yeah. What I said. “Free will” as you define it not only _does not_ exist, it _cannot_ exist according to what we know about physics. True, independent randomness has not been achieved. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585.md?page=26) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brushes-with-the-divine/660585.md?page=28)