Free Will

[synderon]

This post is coming a couple hours later than I intended it. I've been pretty caught up in playing FF VII lately. Also before I get into this I would like to say I don't really like to proof read the things I write, my grammar probably isn't the best, and I may at times arrange my thoughts in odd ways... so deal with it. I would also like to say

Comments

My Thoughts...Pt. 1

[zovick_84]

Wow. For being one of your less deep topics, there is quite a bit here to touch on. (although you do cut quite a bit out by leaving out Christian doctrine for now). It makes it a little harder for me to explain my theory of personality, but I'll do my best. And just a forewarning to people reading this: I realize that at least some of this is supposed to be logical discussion and debate. One of the things you will realize about me is that I'm not unnecessarily the best at logical argument. I arrive at many of my conclusions through intuition and then have to work the logic backwards from there. It makes it difficult for me to explain things sometimes, especially to people that think in a very logical order, so bear with me, and if you have any questions, feel free to ask and I'll do my best to explain

My Thoughts...Pt. 2

[zovick_84]

I realize that I am getting a bit off topic here, but you asked for my thoughts, so you get them, even if they aren't completely related to the topic at hand. The problem with personality theory is that it is difficult to try and find a theory of personality that works on the broad scale that can be applied to people in general, and also one the explains the actions of individual people. When most people think about personality, they think about individuals. how does this person act? Whey are they doing this specific thing? But personality also includes questions of how humans in general act. For example, whether or not man is inherently good or evil is not only a question of philosophy, but a question of personality. Why do people in general act the way they do? The three schools of thought on this are

Re: My Thoughts...Pt. 2

[synderon]

While I didn't include it in my post, personal tastes, interests, and ethics also affect decisions. These along with personality compromise the "self". When I visualize this concept I think of a planet. There is a solid inner core of traits that are unchangeable. After that is a gradient of various layers until you get to the crust. The crust is the part of your self you make visible. It is superficial and can be the most easily changed for whatever situation you are in. You can present your self in any manner that would be most beneficial to you. Events in your life (meteorites I guess in this analogy?) that change you personality can only change it so deep, it's not going to affect the core.

My thoughts (that have already been said)

[triple_24]

This is what is unfair about not being the first one to respond. I applaud dave for making a very nice addition to it but now everything I wanted to say has already been said in dealing with enviroment, meeting new people and basically wanting to make a change in ones self. You can have a girl friend or boyfriend tell you "I can be %100 myself around you" but lets face it, it is a lie. There is always that one thing you hold back from your friends and your mate. I've done it, around a girlfriend i've been held back, calm, and collective but when I'm around my friends I'm wild, out going and unbearably loud.

Free will is not free any more, there are to many factors weighing it down your job, your signifigant other, the people your around. If people expressed true and pure free will...90% of the world would be alone.

Re: My thoughts (that have already been said)

[mad_dog_bowers]

I can't agree with what seems to be your definition of free will. I think I can say with certainty that factors in our lives can certainly influence our decisions heavily, but only the very strongest one can even come close to making decisions for us. Our will is still free, even if we become predictable.

Re: My thoughts (that have already been said)

[hlangin]

The first half of your response makes a lot of sense. We definitely spend a lot of our time managing our identities. Many people exhibit one set of personality traits with one group of people and entirely different ones with other people. This trend has gone so far that I know some in the academic realm have begun to question how real the self is. This brings into question whether our personality is really as fundamental to our decision making process.

I am not sure that I personally would go as far as saying that there is no concrete core personality, nor did you do so, but I do think that it questions how influential our personality is if we can alter it so easily.

[hlangin]

I think that this is a good topic to start on. It is something that most people (myself included) find to be self evident. It seems hard to imagine a predestined world. I do not think that our predispositions to certain actions and personality traits discount the idea of free will. I will however grant that our personalities do often play a role in the choices that we make. However, it is only a role. Our predispositions do not guarantee a certain choice. There are many things in our lives that influence any given choice that we make; these personality traits are only one of many. In my mind, free will is not the complete absence of influence, but the ability to consciously chose which influences to give in to or discard. A normally reserved person can consciously make a decision to discard his or her personality traits and meet a new person (as I believe Dave said). In doing this, that person is choosing what influences are most important (it could be a feeling of loneliness or physical attraction to a person). Our personalities do

[mad_dog_bowers]

"free will is not the complete absence of influence, but the ability to consciously chose which influences to give in to or discard. A normally reserved person can consciously make a decision to discard his or her personality traits and meet a new person"

Ah yes, but is this truly an example of free will? Is it possible that the very thing that causes us to sometimes choose to go against the grain is actually a personality trait itself? One that can be heightened or reduced by stimuli and by learning and socialization? Such traits, or lack thereof, as spite, cruelty, compassion, adventurousness, humor, creativity. Then you take into account the things that sully our grand machine of traits, such as alcohol and stress. In other words, is it possible that this trend which seems to represent a part of our will is actually only a reaction caused by our complex interweaving of personality traits exerting influence on eachother? Perhaps more importantly, can we know this with the information we have available to usDon't worry there is a

[hlangin]

lol...it is also possible to theorize that personality traits do not really exist and that the self does not really exist. so of course it is possible. in a conversation like this there will be no right or wrong answer, just a bunch of theories and even more questions such as these that will remain impossible to answer concretely.

[mad_dog_bowers]

On the contrary I think it would be very hard to argue against the self with the info that we have, while the question I asked remains much harder to answer. I obviously concede that it is a matter of opinion. But lets not get to bogged down with that, I always prefer to leave it unsaid but assumed in a conversation like this that we are giving our own opinions, or playing the devil's advocate on occasion, and not claiming that what we say is fact over everyone else.

Hopefully though you would agree that there is a right or wrong answer, we just don't know it :D

Free will and Personality traits

[silver_hand71]

I intend to convey another means of thinking about personality and free will in which the two interact. For the sake of expressing this new view, I will require that the reader accept that personality traits are, in fact, entirely determined by genetics and environment as Aaron presented in the initial post.

The system laid out in the initial post (which turns personality into a Complex series of If-Then-Else statements) is incomplete. The system in its current form does exist and is used to help make every decision, but it is merely a subsystem, and is capable of being over-ridden. This over-riding force will be called free will for the sake of my argument.

Each person has at least two driving forces, or motivations. I have labeled these motivations "best for others"(A1) and "best for self"(A2). These motivations lead to the conscious decisions that make up freewill.

Before any conscious decision, such as choosing to run naked in the snow, can be made, these motivations are tested against the situation. Is running in the snow in

Re: Free will and Personality traits

[hlangin]

I guess that the message of my post was not clear since you posted the idea of personality and free will being connected. I thought that I had said that personality does indeed influence decision making (aka free will) but does not entirely determine it. I do agree with free-will as being an over-riding force though...but perhaps in a different way. Free will is what allows us to choose which driving forces, influences, responsibilities, and traits to rely on. In some situations our personality does seem to dictate our decisions, but in most situations at least two or more of these are in conflict and it is our free will that prevents us from being stuck forever in a state of confusion or contradiction. (Not sure this makes sense or not...but I think that our ideas are at the very least similar if not expressed differently

Re: Free will and Personality traits

[silver_hand71]

From what you wrote there, and actually, from what I interpreted the first time, we are basically on the same page. Although you have pointed out a few things that I will do my best to clarify in the following

Re: Free will and Personality traits

[hlangin]

I agree with the existence of an objective good...just not on all the things that he claims are objectively good. :) So...I agree but disagree at the same time.

Thanks, you made a lot of your opinions clearer. I'm glad that you made it clear that they affect free will in separate ways and are not the same...makes quite a bit more sense.