free will

12-02-2005, 07:57 PM

for the sake of debate, i wish to ask a question of our readers, to get a response.....

what is your belief in free will? do you believe humans have it? or do you believe in fate?

one cannot believe in both. for if fate is correct, and all our future actions have already been laid out by some great being and we only live out those actions, then our choices are not our choices and we have no free will. only a false acceptance in it's belief.

but if one believes in free will, then fate cannot be accurate, since future action remains a mystery until the action is done. In that sense, fate would contradict free will.

but the question i pose today is 'is there such a thing as free will'? truly FREE will?

my answer is NO. there is not. as per many psychologists, most notably B.F. Skinner, out actions are not truly ours. All human behavior is motivated and heavily influeced by the environment we find ourselves in. Our surroundings, basically the things going on around us, to us and by us, help mold our perception of the situation. this perception then, plus the influence of our past actions (memory), help us make decisions.

But our memory too is only a build up of everything that has happened to us (either directly or indirectly, such as word of mouth or something we saw or heard, etc.). So far, we have the environment shaping perception, which shapes memory, which shapes future percetion and future decision making.

in Skinner's hypothesis, we have no truly pure free will. Since the environment helps mold us, and is in effect, the influential cause of our decisions, was it really US that made the deicion? or the situations we find our selves in forcing us to decide the way we do.

I agree with this. All this is true information, heavily supported by science.

but if this is the case, it is a major blow for all religions. In some form or another, all religion is founded on a form of the Karma Principle. Our decisions (good or bad) is the basis of God's Judgement AKA Karma's effects.

but not so, although we lack a pure absolute free will, we do have freedom of choice. I have the choice to jump up and down right now, but i choose not to. By exercising my choice, i create the feeling of freedom. The will to do anything I want. But in fact, i choose to jump up and down or sit down because my current environemnt allows me to do so.

In sum, i believe pure free will is non-existant. Choice is something all people have, some choices however are harder than others. Based on our choices of action and proper mindset, our karma will come to pass. God as the experiencing principle will allow the karma to happen (the western concept of God's judgemnt is just this).

What do the others here think? please respond intellectually.

12-03-2005, 12:07 AM

Why does it have to be all or nothing? Frreewill absolute or not at all? I mean, why not "limited free will"? free will in what God gives us the choice... and "obedience" in other situations?

12-03-2005, 01:54 AM

Hari OM

And just blindly accept whenever a reputed "scientist" says something in a popular science magazine.

"All human behavior is motivated and heavily influeced by the environment we find ourselves in"

If so then all the people in the same environment should have the same behaviour. Is it happening in the world? just open your eyes and see...

12-03-2005, 04:43 AM

When Lord Krishna says "Uplift self by the self", He clearly indicates that there is free will.

But free will for whom? The Guna bound mind or the pure self? Sage Vashista has given us illumination on this.

Whatever one sows one reaps. Self effort is the supreme. What is Niyati or Daivam or fate is unfolding of reactions of past karma, over which apparently one has no control. This makes us think that fate is stronger. Sage Vashista says: "No, the present self efforts have the strenth of overcoming the reacttions of the past karma(of this life or another).

A man's farm produce blown away by cyclone may be cited as fate but the sage says: "self effort was weaker than the destroying force. So, the farmer should put in more effort".

Springing of shoots and blossoming of a plant is another daivam act. So is man. But here also the Self is the source.

In nutshell. For whom is the fate? Guna bound mind body is bound by fate. The Self is eternally free.

12-05-2005, 09:14 PM

well, what exacl is limited free will? do you mean sometimes we have a choice and sometimes we dont? well, one must think of it psychologically in order to better understand how the mind works and how the decision making process works.

all the decisions we make are based on environmental cues. our senses intake external physical sensation (through sight, sound, smell, etc) and our brain makes sense of the sensory stimulation to create a concept. we do this all our lives. as we grow, as incorporate new information with the old information we already have and associate certain things together.

any decision we face it made due to our past knowledge of things associated with the topic of the delimma that faces us now. based on our knowledge of the past, we make a decision. Read Beyond Freedom & Dignity by BF Skinner, very well known psychologist. he says, and i agree with him, that all our decisions are made based on our past experience and knowledge. When we are in certain situations, our decisions are made based on our knowledge of adaptig to the situation we are in.

Know of the fundamental attriubution error. It basicaly says that we misjudge the intentions of MOST people MOST of the time. we tend to associate other people's behavior with their personality (basically what they like and dislike and choose to do). In reality, people's decicions are mostly due to environmental situations.

to say that all people in the same environment will think alike is wrong because all people come into the environment from different backgrounds, different experiences, differnt range of knowledge.

no two people think alike, therefore no two people will perceive the same thing. even if you think you do.

if you and your mother saw an apple on the table, although both of you obviously know that it is an apple, our understanding of what an apple is would have it's unique differences. The associations that become highlighted in both your memories would be differnet because of the respective things that you guys associated with apple throughout your lives, which are based on the subjective experiences both of you have had.

in the end, what i am afriaid to face is the idea that ultimately here is NO free will. We all make all our decisions based on cues in the environemnt, cues in the situation and in the interaction that we are in.

This is a problem for all religions to face and come to terms with and find the truth about since, it would naturally become the demise of the concept of karma. if all our decisions are based on external stimuli around us, then how can god just us or karma come back to us as being good or bad, since it wasnt our choice to do them?

OH and also, i dont just blidnly follow whatever i read or some "scientist" said. I read and try to understand truth of reality on earth. i incorporate that truth with the eternal truth of dharma which is the main proponent of the maharishis throughout history. it has alwyas been to come to terms with truth because barhman is truth.

hoiwever, many indians claim to believe we alreayd know the truth and it is the truth for all time.

this is not the case. knowledge of the world arround us expands year by year, century by century, millenium by millenium. We have to "choose" to act correctly based on our expanding understanding.

there are many aspects of "science" and many scientists who are out there to expand knowledhe for their own good and bias the forum of scientists. but this is not all people.

to avoid science in favor of traditional dogma is not good. but that is just what sme people imply we should do.
Science and religion are two sides of the same coin. One explains how things in existance work and the other explains why things in existance work. both should be melded together. As times change and the future beomes the present and the past, new knowledge emerges and new religions form to incorporate that.

dont believe that hinduism has been the same all along. INdian religion has changed greatyly in the 5000 some-what documented years of Indian history.

are there any other reasons why free will SHOULD exist?

12-06-2005, 12:22 AM

Hari OM

You seem to contradict yourself.

"he says, and i agree with him, that all our decisions are made based on our past experience and knowledge"

"In reality, people's decicions are mostly due to environmental situations"

So what is your view? you can't say all possible views and then state that you had said so and so later, first come up with one definite view point.

barney · 12-06-2005, 10:33 PM

Different school of thoughts have different view on the subject. So, there would be no difinite view point. You may be right or he may be right but most important that Hinduism believes in both. You would only come to a conclusion when you have personal experience the effect. For instance you would have had an ambition to become a doctor and worked towards that goal but in the end you end up becoming a medical rep. Now how would you surmise this? In this case you would say you're only fated or destined to be a medical rep. Otherwise you would say it was your past karma that brought your fate.

There are cases where the parents dream of making their only son to becpme a lawyer and spent whatever they had on his education but sad to say their son end up a convict behind bars. What would be your conclusion for this case. Was it the son's fault or the parents Karma? There are many things we would not understand and that is the secret that we have to discover our self. Many can make all kinds of assumption but none would be wrong or right. It is an individual experience and conclusion. In some cases all his life a person would have enjoyed the best of the best in life and if you ask him about karma and fate he would brush all this a side and say it is all my own effort. But if you ask me I would say his it was his past karma and fate that he enjoys the best of the best but then you cannot come to a conclusion yet as you have not seen the end of his life. So there is still a Q mark to his end and the transition of his life in the end.

Life is a ticketless travel destination unknown. You may have an aim in life but to fulfill that aim you may need to work on that direction and if fate permits and if your past karma is good than you would reach that goal otherwise it becomes a failure and you might blame others instead of blaming yourself because you need an excuse for your own failure in life. Will power will only work if your karma permits and if your are fated to acheive your goal in life. So, in conclusion there is no definite answer for this until and unless it is your own personal experience that one comes to a conclusion of WILL, FATE and KARMA.

12-07-2005, 01:40 AM

Hari OM

It is ok in the world for the existence of different opinions, but it does not mean a person can have contradicting opinions.

Read my post again, i said "YOU" need to have one opinion to discuss.

If a person has contradicting opinions himself and supports all possible views, then how can an argument take place, an argument can take place, only if You have some specific view and only if arguments take place you can come to a conclusion. If you have all possible views within you, you will only go to confusion.

barney · 12-07-2005, 06:03 AM

FREE WILL: A choice one makes without any interference from the creator.

FATE: What has taken place against ones wishes.

KARMA: Past/Present action bad/good decides the present and future.

Result: Only realize the above after occurence.

So, my friend what do you wish to argue about? It is either one believes in it or otherwise. Asking someone to argue over your point of view is not going to solve anything. Either you believe it or you don't. Freewill, Fate and Karma are all interlinked and you cannot seperate them.

If someone says I did it as I was my wish and dream than it was his fate to acheive that goal in life. If someone says my life is in a mess than it was his past karma that he has to go through such problems. And when he overcomes that problem sometime later in life than it was his fate to overcome that. All in all you should have GOD's grace to help you through bad and good. That is why we turn to him for his blessngs in all our actions. Satisfied?

12-07-2005, 08:18 PM

you say i have two contradicting opinions, and i would like to show that i do not. our decicions (choices/will) is based on the current situation and our evaluation of past situations. so therefore, it is the environment now and the environemtn we were in before that determine our current mode of action.

it is true that our decisions are based on past experiences and situations. we incorporate experiencs and situations into our psyche every second of our lives. all decisions we make are based on any possible expericnes or situations that can give us clues as to how to react to the present situation.

our past experiences only serve as ways for us to perceive our present experience. based on this perception, we act in accordance with the present situation.

so basically, when i decide that i want vanilla ice cream and not chocolate, it is because of the feelings i have at the time of decicion-making. those feelings are due to the environment that i am in at that present moment. also, i take into account the past situations that i have been in where i had to determine the two. based on the those two aspects, we make our choice

so what i am saying is that, decisions are made based on past experience and current situation. both of those are created by situational factors. our past experiences that are stored in our memory are also past of our situation. so if based on these two things, there is no really "free' will. i was forced to choose what i chose based on the experiences that i have had and the situation i am in, NOT because of what i just wanna do.

12-08-2005, 11:47 PM

Hari OM

So you are expanding the scope of your argument.

Your present action is based on:

1) Current environment

2) Past action, which is inturn based on past environment

So basically you are going back to your original post that all actions depend on environment, only you had now divided the environment into present and past

Then the question comes what happened at the beginning .

At that time no soul had Past action....

The environment was same to every soul....

So going as per your theory we had to infer that every soul then should have performed the same action.

So for the next action every soul should have the same Past karma and the same current environment , so they should have performed the second action also as same.

Since this is true for 1, arbitary n, and n+1 we have to come to a conclusion all actions at all times by every body should be same. However this does breaks the observational proof we see in this world.

So the possibilites are:

1) Your assumption that actions are due to environment alone is false

2) My assumption that all souls started with equal environment was false

3) Your assumption free will is possible is false.

I personally like and believe in 3) even though you are "free" to choose any irrespective of our environment or the past threads.

12-09-2005, 03:24 PM

*********The environment was same to every soul....**********

As in the other post, I find your arguments precise.

What are these many souls? Please clarify how the above statement correlates to Bhagwavan's teaching that "though one he appears to be divided among many"?

12-12-2005, 12:39 AM

Hari OM

Dear Atanu Ji,

i had answered your questions in another thread let us continue there, for here i can only say that soul is too general a term which can be applied loosely to chaityana, mind, jiva, atma, brahma and what not?

12-14-2005, 08:19 PM

i see your point, but my friend you are making a sutble mistake.

1. when was the beginning? the cycle of the universe's existance and dissolution is never ending and eternal. there was NO beginning and will be NO end.

but thats a whole other discussion in itself.

2. assuming that there was a "beginning" ;

do you believe that all souls in existance today came from one original soul (other than brahmatman or brahman)?

i believe in a multiplicity of souls. and at the very beginning, having two souls in teh same environment is itself not the same. the fact that they are two seperate souls makes them two seperate entities with two seperate environments. in the same way that a husband and a wife sleeping in the same bed can be said to be in the same environment, but not really. Each environment and situation is read and interpreted by the individual, making individuality itself the difference in environemtn.

therefore, to propose that all souls should act the same because originally they had the same environemnt is untrue. even if the external environemnt is the exact same, it is always interpreted subjectively, therefore differently.

it still doesnt disprove my point that all actions are caused ultimately by environmental cues.

12-15-2005, 12:56 AM

Hari OM

1) Only paratama is beginnigless and endless every thing else has a beginning and end

2) If two souls in the same environment would behave differently it shows the "free will", isn't it?

3) "it is always interpreted subjectively" this in my opinion clearly specifies the free will concept but you say that and then immediately say it is environment alone which determines.

so my dear friend my question is whether "interperation of environment" is decided by environment or the freewill of person?

12-15-2005, 09:56 PM

----------------------------
Only paratama is beginnigless and endless every thing else has a beginning and end
----------------------------

perhaps. that sounds right.

but if our atman is itself paramatman::which in itself is only true if paramatam=brahman:: because brahman is the atman, no?

--------------------------
If two souls in the same environment would behave differently it shows the "free will", isn't it
--------------------------

i disagree. free will is done based on own's consious decision. interpreting an environment through our multiple senses is an automatic response caused from having awareness. In the same sense that some say it is free will when one chooses pizza over a burger. but not free will when one breathes. it is an automatic thing that our body does. one does not ask to think nor try to think, but thinking itself happens.

------------------------------
it is always interpreted subjectively" this in my opinion clearly specifies the free will concept but you say that and then immediately say it is environment alone which determines.
------------------------------

interpreting something subjectively is also not free will. it only displays individuality, seperateness from that which is not - like the difference between me and you.

one does not neccessarily interpret what one wants to interpret. when we see a cow walking down the street, we know its a cow because we interpret it as such. we dont look at a cow and then consiously decide 'hmm, i think im going to see a cow there'.

------------------------
interperation of environment
------------------------
interpretation is decided by two things.

1.the environemtn itself
2.our biological capabilities and limits of our brain and senses. also what the see and interpret physically as a small child gets reinforced by our teachers (not school teachers, but those that teach us things throughout this quest called life).

this does not entail any sort of free will because exhibition or measurements of any form of free will can only be determined when there are two things. one must have the choice between either 'A' or 'B'. going to the grocery store wanting cookies and only seeing chocolate chip cookies entails us to make one of two decicions.

either take the chocolate chip - thereby being the environment because there was nothing else there.

or go elsewhere. this may seem like free will, but then one must think on a psychological level, what made that person choose to go elsewhere. we all have our reasons. no one just chooses not to. theres always a reason behind it. if one searches out the reason and source of the belief that led to the reason, one will find some environmental cues that one has learned in order to make that decision

in summary, your points are understood, but i still disagree. i still find no case for the existance of free will.

this is something that has actually been on my mind for the past week or so. thinking about ths in relation to religion and morality, leads me to find that all concepts of karma, judgement, good/evil actions would all be wrong if it is true that there is no free will.

our concept of god (or karma) calls for justice and fairness. how fair would it be if God in the western concept or karma in the eastern concept would bring us bad experiences based on things that are out of our control.

now please dont get upset and think that i am trying to get rid of or ruin anything. i am not. only trying to find satyam.

12-16-2005, 12:23 AM

Hari OM

"but if our atman is itself paramatman::which in itself is only true if paramatam=brahman:: because brahman is the atman, no?"

this looks like some confusing scientist X statements.

Paramatam IS NOT EQUAL TO brahman, our scriptures clearly say Brahaman is Pitamaha (Grand father) and Paramatma as PraPitamaha (Great grand father) so Paramata is the cause ofr Brahman

I think probably you are confused,my suggestion is to read J. Krishnamurthy's few books. He is a better confuser than you and confusion can be removed by confusion. At the end of reading the books you will either realise the "satyam" or throw away all books and go to "satyam" theatre and start enjoying the life.

12-16-2005, 06:20 PM

-----------------------
Paramatam IS NOT EQUAL TO brahman, our scriptures clearly say Brahaman is Pitamaha (Grand father) and Paramatma as PraPitamaha (Great grand father) so Paramata is the cause ofr Brahman
-----------------------

what scripture is this from?

and what does it mean? then what exaclty is brahman if it is not the eternal unchangable sat-chit-ananda?

what exactly is paramatman then?

12-19-2005, 12:49 AM

Hari OM

Read any scripture it would have this story, since a real scripture should explain about the origin of universe

In Gita, Father of Brahama himself....

In Bhagavatam, the story of Brahama from the navel of Narayana ..

In Vishnu Shashranamam, "Brahama Sarva Loka Pitamaha" ,"Savitha Prapitamaha"....

Read my another thread where i had given a detailed explanation of what i think

Hari -- is the eternal, unchanging sat-chit-ananda Person

OM -- is the conscionuess field created (or manifested) by Hari, this is called Brahama

From the OM all these diverse life-forms had manifested themselves by their effort.

This Brahama is Nirguana at all times and at all places, i.e., it is neither good, nor bad, neither rich nor poor neither happy nor sad etc.,

The point at which a individual soul comes out (?) of Brahama is the Karma, and the karma always acts to maintain the Nirguna characterstic of the Brahama as well as that of an individual Jiva.

So if you are too happy in this life, the Karma tends to induce you to do something that would make you sad in the next life so that your total is zero across the sum of all lifes. Hence you can stand steady in any position for even some time, since the force of Karma always keeps you moving from here to there.

The breaking of this Karma cycle where you can maintain yourselves steady at one point without any change is liberation.

And that is possible only through devotion, all other methods fail, reaching paradise, heaven, hell, becoming a powerful, rich or poor or anything does not give you liberation, you will be forced to change however much you don't like the change.

12-19-2005, 02:28 PM

Power of choice is surely not free will. Free will require a strong let-go attitude ('let-go if a girl friend rejects you for another'), and free-will requires a strong attitude to go-after as if you would never stop.

Linkages to fruits and linkages to the 'I am the doer' or 'I am the experiencer' is all bondage.

In spiritual nature, one is free, one is not the actual doer, one is not the actual experiencer. It's only one's body which is.

"choice = free-will is nonsence" is all nonsense. I call the choice as nonsense, as it's always the case that what you consider a good choice today, might be looked upon as a bad choice tomorrow. Or there might be a very mixed interpretation to settle with. I would say "choice = baggage".

The real thing (rather than choice) is 'You move in a direction to act'. For example, if you are returning an item you are not satisfied with for the price, then 'you are moving forward to reverse the transaction' or 'live with it'.