Discussion Determinism vs Free Will

[Painless_end]

Ok so this question has been on my mind for a while. Some philosophers and scientists say that everything is predetermined. There is no such thing called free will because every thought arises in relation to a previous thought or every thought arises from a biological brain like ours that was formed by deterministic events so everything that comes from our brain, which is, our thoughts, words, and actions are all predetermined.

So for example, it is predetermined that I am here right now typing this post in this exact forum on this exact website. I am alive and functional (barely, but that's another story) and able to form thoughts, words and actions that are combined to make this post.

So if I have a question. Assuming for a moment that there is no such thing as free will, why would many people be born just to suffer horrible things like sexual assault, torture, murder and not be able to retain any control over their lives ? Why would they be born just to suffer ?

Why would someone be born with a genius level IQ and they know how to use it, while others are born with severe mental disabilities ?

If determinism is all that exists, and no free will is present, what's the point of anything? To be completely nihilistic, why not just die ?

Obviously, I have simplified my thoughts to present them in a short summary. There might be many highly intelligent people here who would be able to discuss their views on this topic.

 

[Pluto]

This is a very interesting question. I can give a couple of angles based on my background and sources I trust.

According to near-death researcher Kevin Williams, individuals choose the circumstances of their birth. The reasons could be anything from serving others, repaying some sort of karmic debt, undergoing a process of evolution or something else. Theologian Neale Donald Walsch has shared the same perspective. Whether the remainder of the lifetime is pre-destined is a harder thing to pinpoint.

In the Advaita Vedanta tradition, views on free will vary. Consciousness is said to be a single, infinite, universal entity known as Brahman, encompassing all that is. Therefore our true nature is universal, not individual. Ramana Maharshi said that all events are pre-destined, but that an individual has the ability to choose whether to identify as the illusory separate person, or the impersonal Self. The latter state means that the process of the lifetime concludes without suffering.

A current nondual teacher, Angelo Dilullo, has said that in the spiritually awakened state, it becomes harder and harder to take any particular side in the question of free will. Presumably this is because the individual 'I' who does or does not have free will is itself seen to be an illusion perpetuated by thought. He suggested that others to go through the awakening process themselves, and then tell him whether they feel they have free will or not.

 

[Painless_end]

According to near-death researcher Kevin Williams, individuals choose the circumstances of their birth. The reasons could be anything from serving others, repaying some sort of karmic debt, undergoing a process of evolution or something else. Theologian Neale Donald Walsch has shared the same perspective. Whether the remainder of the lifetime is pre-destined is a harder thing to pinpoint.

This is very interesting. I will need to read more into this.

In the Advaita Vedanta tradition, views on free will vary. Consciousness is said to be a single, infinite, universal entity known as Brahman, encompassing all that is. Therefore our true nature is universal, not individual. Ramana Maharshi said that all events are pre-destined, but that an individual has the ability to choose whether to identify as the illusory separate person, or the impersonal Self. The latter state means that the process of the lifetime concludes without suffering.

Interesting. How long have you been around on this earth because those are very advanced philosophical concepts that appear simple at first glance. Also, are you a Hindu yourself ?

A current nondual teacher, Angelo Dilullo, has said that in the spiritually awakened state, it becomes harder and harder to take any particular side in the question of free will. Presumably this is because the individual 'I' who does or does not have free will is itself seen to be an illusion perpetuated by thought. He suggested that others to go through the awakening process themselves, and then tell him whether they feel they have free will or not.

This seems true at first glance. I don't know what non dual means though.

 

[Pluto]

Interesting. How long have you been around on this earth because those are very advanced philosophical concepts that appear simple at first glance. Also, are you a Hindu yourself ?


This seems true at first glance. I don't know what non dual means though.

Glad you like it. :) I am (well, this body) is 41 and I first discovered a proper spiritual book as a late teenager. Incidentally, that was the aforementioned theologian, Neale Donald Walsch. I don't know if I identify as anything in particular - just a seeker hoping to have a direct experience but also battling an ailing body.

In short, each of the religions has a branch for sincere seekers wanting divine union, rather than the usual human customs, rules, cultures, traditions and so on. Those branches include Christian mysticism, Zen Buddhism, Sufism in Islam and Advaita Vedanta in the Hindu tradition. Keep in mind that they are all saying exactly the same thing, so it's not worth getting into debates, and atheists are not excluded either.

Advaita translates to 'not two', which is a very similar term to non-dual. It's an attempt at verbalising the singular universal consciousness without turning it into just another object or concept. Yes, it is simple. It is so simple that nothing can be said about it. Just stuff like the Biblical quote "I am that I am" or Ramana Maharshi's "it is as it is". In Taoism they say, "The Tao that can be spoken of is not the true Tao."

The goal is to have a direct experience of the true Self (ironically, the Self is referred to as no-self in Buddism) and ultimately a transformation in identity, a.k.a. ego death, moksha, etc. This can happen through various techniques - deep meditation, self-inquiry - or can happen spontaneously in moments of severe stress, or sometimes happens in extreme psychedelic trips, or is seen in near-death experiences.

Even when people have been enlightened, it's hard for an outsider to tell as life seems to go on normally. The true nature always there regardless, so we can't go wrong. Though aspiring to ending suffering and ignorance of true nature is a good idea.

 

[Painless_end]

just a seeker hoping to have a direct experience but also battling an ailing body.

I am sorry to hear that. What ails you?

In short, each of the religions has a branch for sincere seekers wanting divine union, rather than the usual human customs, rules, cultures, traditions and so on. Those branches include Christian mysticism, Zen Buddhism, Sufism in Islam and Advaita Vedanta in the Hindu tradition. Keep in mind that they are all saying exactly the same thing, so it's not worth getting into debates, and atheists are not excluded either.

Have you read and understood the essence of all of these? That's truly amazing. I applaud your intelligence and curiosity. Myself I hardly bother with various religions or their sayings. Although I identify officially as Hindu, I am more spiritual, open minded, and try to seek knowledge based on my own daily experiences rather than read through complicated spiritual texts.

Advaita translates to 'not two', which is a very similar term to non-dual. It's an attempt at verbalising the singular universal consciousness without turning it into just another object or concept. Yes, it is simple. It is so simple that nothing can be said about it. Just stuff like the Biblical quote "I am that I am" or Ramana Maharshi's "it is as it is".

The goal is to have a direct experience of the true Self (ironically, the Self is referred to as no-self in Buddism) and ultimately a transformation in identity, a.k.a. ego death, moksha, etc. This can happen through various techniques - deep meditation, self-inquiry - or can happen spontaneously in moments of extreme stress, or sometimes happens in extreme psychedelic trips, or is seen in near-death experiences.

Identity transformation for me happened under extreme stress many years ago. It did change my view about the world to a large extent.

 

[BruhXDDDDD]

I don't believe in either. Quantum physics suggests that all events are a matter of sheer probability. So far, it has worked great to explain a lot of phenomena. However, it doesn't establish free will any more than the Newtonian model. Randomness entails just as little agency as determinism. Honestly, I don't understand what people would even expect free will to be because I can't imagine anything that isn't explained by probability or by cause and effect.

I can understand theologians who need to believe in it for logical consistency. I find the worldview of those religious people who deny it (e.g. Calvinists) to be very grim. However, I have trouble understanding why secular-minded people would try to justify free will except for being scared by the implications of it not existing.

 

[Celerity]

If determinism is all that exists, and no free will is present, what's the point of anything? To be completely nihilistic, why not just die ?

I guess I agree that there isn't "a point" to anything, but I'm not sure how that follows directly from determinism or why free will's existence would make life worth living. If someone believes they would be better off dead and kills themselves as a result, what matters more? That they made the best decision or that their decision was undetermined?

There is a certain appeal in the idea that we can freely choose our death in suicide, but the when and the how concern me much, much more than the abstract notion that I may have always been destined to die this way.

 

[Pluto]

I am sorry to hear that. What ails you?


Have you read and understood the essence of all of these? That's truly amazing. I applaud your intelligence and curiosity. Myself I hardly bother with various religions or their sayings. Although I identify officially as Hindu, I am more spiritual, open minded, and try to seek knowledge based on my own daily experiences rather than read through complicated spiritual texts.



Identity transformation for me happened under extreme stress many years ago. It did change my view about the world to a large extent.

Do you mind sharing anything about your experience? How long did it last?

I officially identify as a devotee of Ramana Maharshi, who in turn was associated with the South Indian Advaita Vedanta tradition. He emphasised exactly what you describe, focusing on direct experience rather than long-winded texts.

As for me, the story involves family abandonment, trying to overcome mental illness and poverty and eventually burning out. I enjoy discussing this topic, though, as it reminds me that I am not the story. No idea how the story will end but it doesn't really matter. :)

 

[Painless_end]

Do you mind sharing anything about your experience? How long did it last?

Like I said, I have never been a fan of highly complicated spiritual texts unless you are a 80 year old with no responsibilities. My experience came from experience of having been thrust into a job environment which I was wholly unprepared for right after college, which also I was not well prepared for.

Just the simple fact of having to wake up and face the responsibility of life in an environment which I didn't like, with people which I didn't like, created an extreme stress response within me. It lasted for a few days, because in the end, I had to quit the job because of various reasons.

But during some brief moments of absolute clarity, I saw the world, how it was and how I weak and unprepared I was for it.

I would mentally pray for the inspiration to commit suicide because nothing in this world, neither money nor friends, could make me want to willingly suffer what I was suffering. I became extremely suicidal but eventually I couldn't do it because the survival instinct was too high.

I officially identify as a devotee of Ramana Maharshi, who in turn was associated with the South Indian Advaita Vedanta tradition. He emphasised exactly what you describe, focusing on direct experience rather than long-winded texts.

But what nationality and ethnicity are you ?

Ramana Maharshi was Indian, although I only have heard his name and nothing else. Advait Vedanta philosophy is beyond my capacity or even interest to understand. It is not relevant to my current situation in any meaningful way.

As for me, the story involves family abandonment, trying to overcome mental illness and poverty and eventually burning out. I enjoy discussing this topic, though, as it reminds me that I am not the story. No idea how the story will end but it doesn't really matter. :)

Sorry to hear that. Hope you find strength or peace.

 

[Pluto]

That's a very interesting experience. I wish I could have some sense of certainty that my destiny is to leave here soon, as I've been in a holding pattern for a long time. It would bring a lot of peace to have experienced certainty. I wish you the very best with your path too.

I'm from Australia but while I'm afraid to be too specific, the family background is from near India and, in turn, various parts of Western Europe. Ramana was from Tamil Nadu in South India. I would dearly love to visit the ashram where he used to live, but I'm not sure if I'll ever get a chance.

I agree with your comment regarding Advaita Vedanta philosophy. I haven't read any of the classic texts as I don't really have the patience, and thus wouldn't count as a proper follower. Though the proper followers risk filling their heads with book knowledge and thus missing the whole point of abiding in direct experience.

In brief, Ramana was a normal boy from Madurai who had a spontaneous spiritually transformative experience during a panic attack at the age of 16. In that moment, he discovered his true nature as the Self, not the body. He was drawn to Tiruvannamalai and spent the rest of his life there, initially meditating silently before being discovered by others. As Western seekers learned of his advanced spiritual state, people flocked from around the world.

His main 'teaching' was silent sitting, where some advanced seekers had powerful experiences just by being in his presence. When verbal communication occurred, his most common message was along the lines of "You are already the Self / You are Brahman / You are not the mind / etc." If even this wasn't enough, the practical technique that he became famous for was self-enquiry.

I will concede that attempting this in the throes of distress and other extreme mind activity can be frustrating, though conversely, people who have not experienced suffering would have no attraction to this method of destroying the mind/false self in the first place. I realise this is all a bit off topic, but happy to elaborate further on any of these points if anyone is interested.

 

[Superdeterminist]

So if I have a question. Assuming for a moment that there is no such thing as free will, why would many people be born just to suffer horrible things like sexual assault, torture, murder and not be able to retain any control over their lives ? Why would they be born just to suffer ?

Assuming free will, that question would still be unanswered. Just because anything could be chosen, that still wouldn't explain why the choices that were actually made, were what they were.

Why would someone be born with a genius level IQ and they know how to use it, while others are born with severe mental disabilities ?

I don't think the question of intelligence relates to free will. Asking why brains vary is like asking why anything else varies. Why am I shorter than that other guy, etc.

If determinism is all that exists, and no free will is present, what's the point of anything? To be completely nihilistic, why not just die ?

If free will existed, what would be the point of that? This question feels wrong to be asking though, because free will can't actually be made sense of. Anyway, people could just be predetermined to have a nice life so they never want to die. Nihilism surely makes sense if your life is shit, and for the lucky ones it makes sense they wouldn't see the appeal of it.

I'm certain that we don't have libertarian free will because the entire notion is nonsensical. Now, one may redefine free will to something weaker, but that's not of interest to me personally.

Ultimately determinism has to be true (check my username ;) ), because something definite is happening in this thing called life. To say that determinism is false, is to say that indeterminism is true, which is to say that nothing ever happens. Because with indeterminism, there is no way of obtaining, aka determining a future state from a present state.

Many like to say that quantum mechanics is indeterministic, but this is only true in the sense that QM doesn't tell us the future state of systems, it just gives probabilities. That just means that QM is an incomplete theory. Obviously what we want in physics is to obtain the future state from the present state, aka make predictions.

You might then ask, what if it's just fundamentally impossible to achieve that? Well maybe, but then you need to explain physically why that would be impossible, and QM fails to do that, so it's still incomplete in this case.

I encourage you to look into superdeterminism which has for too long been a forgotten idea in physics, but happily is seeing some renewed interest lately.