OBSERVATION 0:
CAUSALITY
DETERMINISM x FREE WILL x CAUSALITY
The way we experience the world makes us who we are—it’s what makes us unique. Interestingly, our perspectives about the world shape how we experience it.
Abstract: Our perspective is shaped in part by the words we use to interpret what we see or interact with. Curiously, words are dynamic in that, not every word has the same meaning to everyone. Apperceptions, interpretation, context, inflection can all influence and augment the meaning of a word. What’s more, because words are dynamic and are subject to interpretation, what does this say about the true nature of our individual experiences of the world? Moreover, how does the dynamism of words impact the choices we make that define our individual experiences—that define us as unique beings? More interesting, within the context of “choices”, if words are dynamic, does this mean that our choices can be influenced? If yes, are we really free to choose? Or, is there a greater force or something at play that is making our choices for us?
A New Metanarrative
Words x Free will x Determinism
Within the context of “being free to choose” or “a greater force making choices for us”, there are two prevailing concepts that attempt to define these phenomena: free will and determinism. How you interpret the words that define free will or determinism shapes how you live your life, the choices you make, and thusly how you experience the world.
Before we dive in
Free will: is the capacity or ability to make choices or decisions. The ability to make decision or perform actions independently of any prior event or state of the Universe.
The ability to make decisions or perform actions void of any causal influence.
Indeterminism: Some events have no deterministic cause but occur randomly or by chance (Kim Matrix/Glitch in the matrix)
Determinism: Posits that the choices or decisions a person makes, it is impossible that they could have made any other decision.
Curiously,
“Arguments for free will have been based on the subjective experience of freedom, on sentiments of guilt, on revealed religion, and on the common assumption of individual moral responsibility that underlies the concepts of law, reward, punishment, and incentive.”
To advance the conversation, I want to isolate some key phraseology within the definition of free will: “The ability to make decision or perform actions independently of any prior event or state of the Universe.” What this says to me is that, “any prior event” alludes to the notion of causation.
Causation in simple terms is an action or event that pushes a chain of events into motion. Think of causal factors as a type of gradient (To illustrate the idea of fluidity and the concept of phase transition) that evolves from 0 point to infinity. I say infinity because once an action or event is set into motion, you can’t predict its endpoint (Relatively speaking). If causation exists within the context of a continuum, as opposed to a type of top-down or bottom-up hierarchy, does this support the notion that Consciousness=Perspective? If yes, does this support the notion that Perspective is pliable?
“Perspective is a tool, not a guiding principle”- FTR_XBN[GPT]
A hammer can be utilized for a myriad of tasks, but it is not always the appropriate tool. Perspective is pliable. Perspective is an aspect. Perspective can be influenced by words.
How can we apply this to Free will and Determinism? In the example below, we illustrate the notion that although 0 represents a starting point, within the context of a closed loop, the perspective of the observer plays a role in determining the causal hierarchy. Where one is positioned within the context of their observation determines what is observed. It’s an endless loop with a myriad of viable starting points.
Curiosities
If words are dynamic, exist on a continuum, are subject to interpretation, and our understanding of words influence our choices, then would it be fair to assume that one could then augment someone's belief in free will or determinism by changing the context of the words used to describe either of the respective perspectives
Data is objective, the interpretation of the data is subjective.
Gal 5:1 It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yolk of slavery.”
“Free will without God’s grace is not free at all, but is the permanent prisoner and bond slave of evil, since it can not turn itself to good.” — Martin Luther
In Christian theology the notion of free will is a binary choice. It’s a choice between accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and savior (salvation) or choosing to live within the scope of your true nature as a sinner (sin-nature) and face eternal damnation. Interestingly, free will is not binary. As such, this presents a bit of a paradox.
Before I go further, l’d like to make mention and present the definitions for the words “free” and “will”.
Free
adjective
-
not under the control or in the power of another; able to act or be done as one wishes.
-
not or no longer confined or imprisoned.
adverb
-
without cost or payment.
verb
-
release from captivity, confinement, or slavery.
Will
noun
-
the desire, inclination, or choice of a person or group.
-
the faculty of wishing, choosing, desiring, or intending.
-
a legal declaration of a person's wishes regarding the disposal of his or her property after death.
Free will is predicated on the notion that a person has the latitude to make choices void of any antecedent influence.
But in Christianity, have you ever heard the phrase, “Damned if you do, damned if you don’t?” Well as it relates to choosing between salvation or damnation, the fundamental principles of free will are violated, in that, there exists an antecedent influence: choose Jesus or burn in hell. Quite frankly, it seems a bit Authoritarian.
It’s analogous to a person atop a burning skyscraper having to choose between being incinerated by the raging fire who’s insatiable appetite is rapidly consuming their hair and skin, or feeling the cool breeze of the great outdoors gently caressing and soothing your sun-kissed skin, as you plunge into a glistening pool of concrete.
And so, if you apply the concept of free will into the context of Christianity, sure you have a choice, but it’s within the context of a predetermined and restricted field of options.
What’s more, If you think of “free” as being void of cost or payment, when you apply that logic to Christianity, if you don’t choose Jesus, the cost is eternal damnation. Who wants that? Are voting for Putin or Putin?
Unabridged and unhinged
I find it curious, that as it relates to Christian doctrine, we aren’t simply able to believe in the miracle of Jesus rising from the dead and then gleaning our own insights from it. Instead, we have to embrace the notion that we are born imperfect. That a man paid the price for our imperfection and thusly we are eternally indebted to him. However, instead of having the option to pay off the debt with monetary compensation, we can only pay through our allegiance and love to him. (Don’t forget the meaning of free: released from captivity, confinement or slavery).
“I didn’t ask you to pay my way. Basically what you’re saying is, I work for you as soon as I get here. Which means that I wasn’t born free— it’s analogous to children of slaves being born into slavery. So did you bring me here as free labor—as slave labor. Did you trick me like a recruiting trip to a college. You tempted me with all of the trappings of freedom, but then you reneged? Like I’m your employee? If I’m your employee, I technically don’t have free will. If I decide to not show up to work, do I still get a paycheck? If I decide that I want to be the boss and give everyone an early retirement package, can I do that? Because if I can’t, I’m not really free.”
Moreover, what if I like my imperfections? Imperfections in a painting are what make it unique. Oswald Boateng said, “I like the uniform because it shows the individuality of each student. Style is individual. Even within the uniform structure, you’ll see the characters of the children in their uniform.” Consequently, If one chooses (because we have free will right?), the alternative of not pledging allegiance to Jesus, one faces eternal damnation and being shamed and/or cast out of the inner sanctums of their family network and community.
What’s more, if your parents are believers in this ideology, because your parents gave you life, they are allowed to control your choices and have domain over you for your life’s entirety. You must honor them—even if they are straight up trash and not of good moral character. You work for Parent’s Inc. as their indentured servants. I don’t have a problem owing someone a debt of gratitude. However, according to Larry Poons, “You don’t decide certain things. You don’t pick your parents and you don’t pick who you are.” Not only did I not choose my parents, I didn’t choose to be here—I didn’t ask for any of this. Giving passage to my existence was their choice. Where is the free will in someone making the choice for me? In the context of free will, I have have yet to make my own choices. This is absurd.
Oh yeah, I forgot, you have to make a 10% offering of your earnings to the church. In short, I owe Jesus in perpetuity, I owe my parents in perpetuity and I have to tithe a percentage of my net earnings to an institution. How do I ever get out of debt? At this rate, there’s no way I can retire at 65. I have life, but I am not free.
In closing, what is the fundamental reason that god made humans imperfect? Why the flaw? Is it simply to establish control or domain over another being? It certainly seems that way.