What does a world look like in the absence of free will. I understand this will knock on the Calvinist door but it also knocks on the atheists door also. And the atheist is who I usually spend time debating as to why I am challenging that worldview and that view has unknowingly persuaded other Christians. The world of a true materialist is a world absent of free will.
Before I explain the a world absent of free will, I will define my key words.
Libertarianism Free will: I hold the Libertarianism view which is the concept of free will that requires the agent to be able to take more than one possible course of action under a given set of circumstances. ( Not related to politics)
Interactionism or interactionist dualism: is the theory in the philosophy of the mind which holds that matter and mind are two distinct and independent substances that exert causal effects on one another.
Metaphysics: is a branch of philosophy that explores the nature of being, existence, and reality. It does not explore religious beliefs and laws created by man, but rather, it explores the immutable laws of nature, set by The Creator, God/Universal Presence, in the creation of the Universe. The observed affects of a unseen cause.
Materialism: a theory that physical matter is the only or fundamental reality and that all being and processes and phenomena can be explained as manifestations or results of matter.
Matter: In the classical physics observed in everyday life, matter is any substance that has mass and takes up space by having volume. All everyday objects that we can touch are ultimately composed of atoms.
Primordial soup: is a term introduced by the Soviet biologist Alexander Oparin. In 1924, he proposed the theory of the origin of life on Earth through the transformation, during the gradual chemical evolution of molecules that contain carbon in the primordial soup.
Evolution: the scientific theory explaining the appearance of new species and varieties through the action of various biological mechanisms (such as natural selection, genetic mutation or drift, and hybridization.
Animal instincts: Instinct is an inherent behavior; a fixed action pattern that is unlearned. Animals are born with certain instincts which are common to all those in their breed. Some instinctual behaviors require a certain amount of maturation before they begin. The most obvious one is the instinct to mate and propagate.
Herd: is a social group of certain animals of the same species. Bonded together to better their chances of survival.
Sociobiology is a field of biology that aims to examine and explain social behavior in terms of evolution.
As described above in materialism the only thing that exists is the physical realm, the natural realm or made of matter. All of life on Earth came from a natural cause. The most held theory is called the primordial soup. We first began through a random event by a systematic game of chance in a billions of years timeframe.
Many theories suggest how the primordial soup came to be but one day all the elements for life came together and began a gradual chemical evolution of molecules. This gradual change is usually what the secular scientific world calls evolution.
Speed up time from soup, to fish, to vertebrate mammal, to ape, to caveman, and finally to modern human.
Where did free will enter the biological mix?
Well it couldn't of under a only natural cause. Everything is a chemical reaction. The brain is all material and thus only reacts to its surroundings. We are in many ways just more Intelligent animals that are predetermined by natural selection, instincts inherited by past species like the ape, environmental factors like survival of the fittest, and robots reacting to chemical reactions.
This is how a true materialist must deny the idea of a objective morality. They must deny sin, evil and good. Everything is subjective and truth is only true to the individual as they are only responding to the environment from internal evolutionary programming.
Under this explanation. What kind of world would this be if truly followed?
1. Obviously morality couldn't exist
2. Just laws wouldn't exist
3. Justice wouldn't exist
4. Life isn't sacred
5. Sin doesn't exist
6. In the Animal kingdom whoever is the strongest controls the environment. Everyone else responds to the strongests actions in order to survive.
Examples: Someone like Hitler couldn't be judged by others because good and evil doesn't exist. His actions was only him responding to his brain. In reaction he was only surviving in a herd type of complex. The sociobiological response led to his choices of enacting genocide, eugenics and environmental control of surrounding countries. All in order to survive and protect his herd.
Laws are just subjective and change with environmental factors, human needs, and the top dogs actions.
Justice is a illusion because technically no right and wrong exists. Just survival.
-------------------------------------------------------------
So what happens if from a theological perspective if we use the absence of free will concept? Well we must first examine what free will looks like before comparing the absence of free will.
In more detail free will is
1.The Man is the origin and cause of his own actions.
2: The Man, in most cases
, will have the ability to choose between 2 or more options. And whichever option he chooses, he did not have to make that choice. He could have chosen one of the alternatives.
3: The Man’s choice was undetermined. Nothing internal or external to the man causally determined the man to make the choice he did. His choice was uncaused or undetermined.
Interactionist dualism is simply the mind and brain are separate but work together. The mind is metaphysical while the brain is physically material.
Interactionism was propounded by the French rationalist philosopher Rene Descartes (1596–1650), and continues to be associated with him. Descartes posited that the body, being physical matter, was characterized by spatial extension but not by thought and feeling, while the mind, being a separate substance, had no spatial extension but could think and feel.
So Mind= thinking and feeling
Brain= physical response to the mind.
"I doubt, therefore I think, therefore I am"
-Rene Descartes
This simple sentence is a mental exercise that shows we are free thinkers. I doubt and think shows a boundary beyond just instincts or chemical responses.
The evidence of morality is evidence for God. The moral law is evidence of a metaphysical right and wrong universal standard that we all knowingly or unknowingly react to. Also proving immaterial things exist.
A world without free will but belief in God means everything is predetermined. God is the author of sin and evil. If free will doesn't exist neither was the actions of Satan. Everything was predetermined by God.
Now obviously in light of the evidence for free will, morality, and the characteristics of God being all just, all good, and Holy. A God who is the author of sin and evil isnt the God of the Bible.
A world with God and absence of free will is also a world absence of morality, absence of just laws, absence of true justice, and life predetermined is every action also is within God's will including Hitlers.
Conclusion:
A Atheistic worldview just doesn't follow reality or any belief without free will. Free will is a tricky thing to pretend it doesn't exist.
If libertarian free will does not exist, rationality and knowledge do not exist. If all things are causally determined, then that includes all thoughts and beliefs.’ If our thoughts and beliefs are forced upon us, and we could not have chosen better beliefs, then we are simply left assuming that our determined beliefs are good (let alone true).
Except we also use the laws of logic to reason and come to a rational explanation for the reality we live in. Therefore for anyone to debate against free will they must use reason and logic and proving free will at the same time. Otherwise you must admit your not really thinking but only reacting.
If this sounds confusing. It can be when you start trying to deny reality.
View attachment 204151
3
