Who believes freewill is only conditional and why or why not?

Answer 1

The only conditions on free will are imposed by nature, society and by ones own internalized values.

Nature does not allow levitation or similar "against-nature" acts no matter how much one might will them to happen - these are easy conditions to understand. Society, (most societies,) won't allow murder and similar unlawful disorder to go unpunished and these deterrent threats are also easy conditions to understand. Internalized values, ones accepted moral code, are a different story altogether.

I think that it is all but impossible for an individual to act against that which he believes is "truly wrong," e.g., pointless destruction, suicide or murdering are impossible acts to perform for most sane individuals to do, provided they sincerely believe that such behaviors are fundamentally "wrong."

In order to express ones free will and act against his internalized values, i.e., choose to do a "wrong" act in spite of its "wrongness," one must generate something, a justification, within his own mind which tips the balance from "wrong" to "right" before he can freely act out his chosen will. This may or may not be possible for all individuals to do, but the condition does remain true, nonetheless - an individual can only act out his will freely if he sincerely believes within himself that his action is "rightly justified."

There are no other conditions that I can see which restrict ones choices to act freely however he may see fit.

Our ability to choose belongs most certainly only to ourselves - and damn the consequences if you have the balls do it.... Remember, "We are the music makers and we are the dreamers of dreams."

[][][] r u randy? [][][]
.

Answer 2

You can make a choice to do something thanks to your free will. But you cannot always make a choice what consequences will follow as a result of your choice. You can make a choice to put your finger over the burning flame. That is your choice. But it will cause you pain and blister. That is an inevitable consequence.
You can call a free will conditional because the consequence of your freewill act may not necessarily be desirable. So, the only difference is in having knowledge of cause and effect relationships and making conscious choices. The knowledge will stop you from making a harmful choice. That is the wise way of practicing your free will.

Answer 3

I'm not sure what you mean and you did not give details about it. I have some links below from Wikipedia and the Catholic sites about free will. The last one is a very good dialog about it.

The only comment I have about it is that man is not God that he can know what his future is. Therefore the choices he makes are based on his own experience in life. Just like Adam and Eve did not know know what God's plan was for them. They disobeyed God knowing a penalty was forthcoming but did not understand it. Man lives in this state and it is natural.

I just looked at some of the remarkable dialog in the last site. The one thing that some people think is since God foreknows all things then God must be the author of sin. But it is equally true that God is the author of salvation for every man. And as finite men, since we do not know the mind of God, it is important for us to make up our own minds. God is the one who will reward accordingly.

Answer 4

Free will is a concept created by those who use it to control others.
A person's behavior depends on brain chemistry, various other physical circumstances, genetics, environment -- things that are real and in many cases can be measured. Science has been showing us how these things produce our behavior for quite some time, but science won't mess with the controllers, so their understanding doesn't translate into change.
By claiming people have free will, they can judge people, punish them, hold them in contempt for behavior that isn't chosen but is the sum of the things I mentioned.
Mostly, of course, the problem is with religions. but the right wing extends it past the pulpit.

Answer 5

I will say free will is conditional, but not because of any religious context. I believe that outside of the first breathe we ever take, our every action - and inaction - is colored and affected by our surroundings and upbringing. We are never free of social mores and morays; we tailor our actions to fit into that society or to blatantly go against it.

We think we are the only ones making that choice, but the experiences of everyone else in the world piled onto ours actually limits our actions and thoughts - henc, no free will.

Answer 6

I feel certain that free will is only conditional. It is tempered by governmental laws, society's mores, responsibilities, intelligence, education, abilities and disabilities... etc. One has only as much freedom as is allowed by the era and the conditions under which he or she exists. That is why the argument of predestination versus free will is not valid since predestination implies a creator who has designed his/her creation from the onset of time to its end and somewhat unfairly since we would all most likely prefer to live an existence of cosmic significance! Total predestination would defeat partial free will in philosophical combat..

Answer 7

Freewill is an illusion.

Answer 8

you probably need to elaborate on what you mean

free will is a pretty loaded term.
man has a free will period
however it is a will tinged by a fallen nature and limited by the desires of the fallen nature

as a criminal would run from a policeman will freely, a person will inwardly run from God given no constraints or drawing and it takes grace to come to a saving faith

Answer 9

You need to clarify free will. If you mean the "free will" given to us by God, that is unconditional. We can choose to love him or not...to go to hell or heaven.

Free will in society? Yes, that's definitely conditional.

Answer 10

free will or right to make a choice is limited but not conditional, when you are aware of consequences.