The REAL Red-Pill on Free Will!

My website: lukesmith.xyz
Classical books reprinted by me: lindypress.net
Get all my videos off KZbin: videos.lukesmi...
or Odysee: odysee.com/$/i...
Please donate: donate.lukesmi...
BTC: bc1qd20r7phdct3t0e0z6jqs55ulectg25pngt7hyl
XMR: 89yML3AtqnTNdo3wNuoaW44D94Zx1kBZNSBc9SyNxGdaKEZwZNdVzvy9zpbzJMzysiWZEU3b5LwjQ3XwWuQsknCF8JK73yv
OR affiliate links to things l use:
www.vultr.com/... Get a VPS and host a website or server for anything else.
www.epik.com/?... Get a cheap and reliable domain name with Epik.

[@zipkitty]

I told my mom not to buy the dinosaur shaped nuggies, and she stopped. Wow I DO have a lot of say in my life.

[@speedyfox9080]

Why would you say no to the dinosaur shaped nuggies?

[@OtherDalfite]

When I was a boy my dad always kept soda in the house. I knew that if it was in the house, I would drink it. I told him to please not buy it. He stopped and what do you know, I dropped my soda habit. Haven't kept it in my house since I moved out, don't miss it a bit.

[@Anton43218]

My mom does this with sweets but she hadn't stopped when I said to not buy them. It took a while but I dont eat sweets now.

[@hodgeyhodge8414]

@@OtherDalfite based and self improvement pilled

[@fsmoura]

I told my dad he'd better keep the sodas coming, or he's gonna know the true meaning of family feud and I'm not kidding just try me and find out . . . (seems to be working so far)

[@THEDRAWINGSTUDIO1]

Luke smith makes a video on reducing internet usage then drops three videos in the span of two days. Gotta say I still love this channel

[@metapaloozashowchannel12]

Maybe he did one video in 3 parts?

[@OtherDalfite]

He's probably had these 3 stored up and just uploaded them all in quick succession

[@GeorgeFosberry]

Don't see any contradictions

[@TheSolidSnakeOil]

Don't worry, he'll disappear for 8 months soon.

[@enjoful]

ITS AI GENERATED WAKE UP

[@AK-hf3pf]

Youth pastor Luke out here dropping some hard knowledge on the youth.

[@TheMacedonianGeneral]

John Calvin been real quiet since this dropped.

[@Refresh5406]

Ftfy

[@HeadakusMaximus]

John Calvin is still upset about that golden fiddle he lost to that Georgian hick.

[@BenMordecai]

Sorry bro, Calvin already addressed this in book 3, chapter 17 of the Institutes of the Christian Religion. tl;dr is that Calvin never made these claims.

[@tbkswagg]

@@BenMordecai okay protestant

[@BenMordecai]

@@tbkswagg you can keep your larp religion.

[@sasakanjuh7660]

Btw, the joke which kinda touches on similar matter: There was a giant flood and a very religious man was almost drowning, but he had a dream/vision the night before that god will save him, so he kept waiting.. Suddenly, the guy with boat came and saw a man, and started pulling him out of the water/on the boat, but man refused to be taken, since he was waiting for the god to save him.. After guy on the boat saw man doesn't want his help, he just gave up and moved on.. After that, couple more guys tried to do the same, but all to the same end.. Finally, man drowned, and went to heaven.. When he saw god, he asked so desperately: "God, I was waiting for you to save me, why did you abandon me??", to which god looked very confused at the man and said: "What are you talking about?? I tried to rescue you like 3 times.." I'm not a native speaker, so hopefully I didn't butcher it too much and managed to get the message across :)

[@crusaderACR]

LMAO

[@ak-1271]

I remember this! It's an awesome story!

[@abuzerdag]

"You have to do what I say cause I'll bully you if you don't" -Luke Smith

[@spergius]

bully Smith

[@ChristianTheChicken]

Wow the chemicals in my brain created a positive experience upon watching this video thus incentivizing me to do as Luke says. Science rulez!

[@wuwei473]

IFLS

[@CorrectCrusader]

WOW I LOVE SCIENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@andrew66769]

Me when science

[@rightwingsafetysquad9872]

But why are those chemicals positive?

[@classicpinball9873]

@@rightwingsafetysquad9872 chemicals respond to good stimuli, no stimuli no response and you lose

[@АндрійПенцак-к5м]

After I struggled for 20 minutes in supermarket to decide if I want a beer or I need to do the right thing and not to drink beer today, my questions about existence of free will disappeared by themselves.

[@АндрійПенцак-к5м]

​@@screwstatists7324 If I was russian it would be vodka, I wouldn't be able to resist.

[@_________________404]

The Russian algorithm

[@packmandudefake]

@@_________________404 you probably meant 'ruZZian', why to spell nazis with capital letters and without their own swastikas of a new time. Edit: Andriy is an Ukrainian name, but yes consuming alchocol is a bad habit that, sadly, a lot of Ukrainians still have.

[@_________________404]

@@packmandudefake Cringe antifa

[@slavic_commonwealth]

@@packmandudefake how much twitter you read bro 💀

[@Alex-yq2uy]

Every based anon had to go through edgy atheist teen phase

[@JohnDoe-yq9rt]

ill never believe in a god invented by israelis lol

[@tsurugi5]

>anon go back

[@JohnDoe-yq9rt]

@@tsurugi5 "based anon" lol

[@c4call]

I guess im not an anon anyway, but I went from christian to essentially pagan with natural deterministic perception. High level of personal responsibility. You're responsible not only for how you react to circumstances, but also responsible for the circumstances themselves.

[@redcrown5154]

just become christian dude@@c4call

[@ethanjohn7638]

"God has a plan for the universe, but the plan involves you". That was such a life affirming sentence, thanks dude.

[@ezra4554]

Misread that as "The REAL Red-Pill on Free Wifi!"

[@BurgerKingHarkinian]

The good version

[@alionicle]

what if phones but too much

[@quagmiretoiletgaming]

anywhere you go?

[@mskiptr]

@@quagmiretoiletgaming the meme channel is a Luke Smith enjoyer!? I should have seen it coming tbh

[@classicpinball9873]

@@quagmiretoiletgaming hold up!

[@arnae9532]

Interpreting that determinism is about believing that things happen regardless of your will is retarded, since your perceived will itself, would still be part of the cause-consequence chain. Rejecting determinism only because you feel it will lead you to act irresponsibly and passively, precisely as an inevitable consequence, is ironic. A person who actually understands determinism would still perceive that their thoughts and actions have an impact on their life. Simply as part of a complex causal chain of events, but without considering them negligible.

[@7enima682]

The problem here is with that the determinism, while being compatible with many different ontologies, mostly goes hand in hand with hard physicalist reductionist one, because it's quite simple ontologically and just makes a ton of sense. And from that POV (which I assume you hold, cuz if you're a determinist and not a physicalist - why. Like literally why.), your sentence is meaningless. Term by term - what "feels" are you talking about? Responsibility? Passiveness? Impact on your life? What is a "life" anyway? "Perceived will?" What the fuck is a "perceiver"? All is a slop pile of particles and matter and nothing deserves anymore consideration than that. You don't control anything not because everything is a complex chain of events, but because there is no "you". Yeah, that's pretty bad. I held that view for a while and that was, idk, I'd even say kinda traumatizing. Maybe you're built different in that regard, but idk how a human being can hold this kinda view and not feel like shit. Thankfully, phenomenal consciousness exists and there are very good arguments for its existence (on top of it being self-evident), so I get to keep my intellectual honesty and not feel bad! Nah, but being fr - idc abt the feels aspect, the existence of phenomenal consciousness kinda destroys physicalism (or demands radically new physics which would lead to physicalism but only in name). And this existence of this unexplainable shit called qualia, combined with the fact that the feeling of free will is a qualia itself - idk, it suggests to me there's still much more to the debate. No more (I really have no idea where to even begin to think about this stuff), but certainly no less

[@arnae9532]

@@7enima682 A physicalist may believe that phenomenal consciousness is how a brain processes sensory phenomena from a first-person perspective, and that there is nothing more to it. A dualist may believe that his body is a vessel and that his soul interacts with the material world without directly being part of it. Both theories have functionally the same implications on your reality and allow the same possibilities. Believing in either has no real implication (at least until death), so it isn't unthinkable that someone that genuinely understands physicalism would just not care. Nevertheless, I still agree with what you said, the average person is going to feel similar to you regardless, with feelings of meaninglessness and insignificance, mostly because of negative nihilism, since physicalism is incompatible with most religions or spirituality, which some need. Still, any arguments against physicalism don't directly disprove determinism. After all, when your soul consciously chooses to do something, you don't really choose randomly. There are genuine preferences, feelings, or impulses that you don't consciously choose, and they influence your actions. To have free will would imply the ability to consciously choose those too, which would mean there is no "you" since a councious being with no incentives or deterrents, loses shape and devolves into randomness. You don't behave randomly, there are agents beyond your control in your psyche that influence you deterministically, wether you believe they where written into your soul, or believe they result from neural connections, they are self-evident and they define your identity.

[@7enima682]

@@arnae9532 first of all - I feel like I left the impression that I'm a dualist. I am not. I'm kinda agnostic, really, but the dualist position has a lot of issues, more than a physicalist one, so I'm still leaning physicalist (although we would need new physics that could contain qualia in itself) the thing is, is that if we agree that qualia and phenomenal consciousness are something special (whether you're a physicalist or a dualist - its origin is really unimportant rn), as in, possess a set of properties that haven't been seen in any other object in the external world, then we really have a problem with that kind of extrapolation. If a car wheel breaks off on a road or something like that, it's very reasonable to assume that there was a deterministic reason to that - because that's how the classical physical world works. But if I'm making a choice, thinking about a problem, reflecting upon my emotional biases - I am, self-evidently, not interacting with objects made of matter, but with objects in my mind, with, as we have established from the first proposition, a *completely different* set of properties. How can I, then, simply handwave it to some "agents beyond my control", as I did with the car wheel? "Handwaving" is not even being derogatory here, as every determinist just invokes complexity in this case. It's not an accusation of being dishonest, because if we assume determinism is true it makes sense to do that, it's just definitionally what is happening here. If I'd like to say that I actually can reflect, observe my biases that would hinder my decision making and consciously change them under the influence of arguments both external and conjured entirely by my mind, you can just go "oh, there probably was some other thing that made you do that. What exactly? Idk, it's immeasurably complex, I'm only human and my brain is limited - I can't know!". What can I actually do to disprove it? Say that it's a qualitatively different thing? "Evolutionary stuff, adaptation", or whatever. You could say that I'm genetically inclined to think this way and whatnot, but you probably see the issue here - determinism unjustifiably subsumes everything unto itself by incessant handwaving justified by invoking complexity. There is nothing I can do to pierce this. And idk, I choose to believe my eyes and ears and brain somewhat - they gave us everything we've got as a civilization and a lot to me personally, so probably they reflect at least some truth. Tying it into free will. Do I assert that it exists? Nope. Do I think that we even have a good definition of it? ABSOLUTELY FUCKING NOT MAN HOLY JESUS. But most of the things about our minds (which is the only type of object that people intuitively consider both non-deterministic and non-random) is genuinely mysterious and not understood, so explaining them in mechanistic terms is, imo, hasty at the very least

[@Bristecom]

Yes, the Bible is full of God giving commands to us yet so many Christians cop-out by trying to give all their responsibilities back to God. My ex-gf would always say "If it's meant to be it's meant to be - if it's not, it's not" and give little to no effort to work things out on her own, which annoyed me so much because it's like, God gave us free will and we can choose to do things or not - it's not just going to always "magically" happen on its own. And of course Calvinists are the worst as they believe we have zero free will and that God is the source of all evil in the universe.

[@FinrodFelagund5]

It's quite funny how irrationally mad people get about the "Calvinist" view of man's will, which is really nothing more than what the apostle Paul lays out in Romans 9. Even confessed Christians can't let go of the idea that the choices of men are at the center of the universe and not the will of God.

[@crusaderACR]

@@FinrodFelagund5 Ok prot

[@FinrodFelagund5]

@@crusaderACR OK, pedophile.

[@worldpeace_2644]

Who told you that Calvinists think God is evil? They believe that everything we do is sin. There is no mention of God being evil.

[@anon5075]

That's like praying for a bountiful harvest and not so much as sowing a single seed. Your field is going to be barren in harvest because God doesn't respect sluggards.

[@flarfo348]

even if free will doesn't exist, as "organic machines" we're still responsible for making choices that are better for us and those around us. people just misinterpret not having free will as "give up"

[@miladragon]

Exactly, he's assuming that determinism implies fatalism, which it doesn't. Free will is an illusion, but illusions are still useful constructs.

[@YeeLeeHaw]

That is cherry picking the issue. You can't have the cake and eat it at the same time. If you have no free will, you can therefore not make any decision; it's all determine already, you have no responsibility.

[@zverh]

@@YeeLeeHaw If it is not determined, then it is random. Free will is doomed either way.

[@YeeLeeHaw]

@@zverh If it's not determined it's not just random, as there will be an intent there. If everything was just random we would have a random world where all decisions would be random, which is obviously not making any sense.

[@zverh]

@@YeeLeeHaw My point was about the intent itself. As Schopenhauer said, *"You can do what you want, but you cannot want what you want."*

[@elpachanga]

I believe that whether free will exists or it is an illusion is totally irrelevant and the fact that everything is predetermined shouldn't affect our decision making at all. To me it is simpler to imagine that everything is predetermined but I am fully aware that I am responsible for my own decisions, it would be stupid to think that because there is only one possible outcome we should just sit and wait to die, that would just mean I was predetermined to be a fucking idiot.

[@bakters]

"I used to think philosophy made sense, then I grew up."

[@Joe-Przybranowski]

More like 'i used to believe in causality but now I don't want to'

[@bakters]

@@Joe-Przybranowski " *i used to believe in causality* " Believe? The kind of causality I think is definitely real has no place for "belief", so you must mean something else, which I'm allowed to opt out of. That's the problem with philosophy. Words have such broad scope of meanings, that it's basically impossible to make solidly verifiable statements. That's how it fails at discovery.

[@uncreativename9936]

I think it was Marcus Aurelius who put it like you're an actor in a play, in that you do have a predetermined role, but how well you play the role is up to you. Which is kind of similar to the Hindoo view of Dharma.

[@Assault_Butter_Knife]

yea exactly I find it a bit weird how dismissive Luke was of what he said was 'cope' in trying to find consolidation between free will and determinism, because to me at least it is just as obvious that we have free will as it is that there are external factors that limit or influence it. There is more to our decision making that what we consciously are aware of and no doubt our lived experience, upbringing and maybe even genetics play a role have an effect we may not necessarily be aware of at the time

[@J-Ton]

The Hindoos also believe in quite a lot of dark pagan ideas, including the idea that the great mind of humanity can shape reality

[@tbk2502]

@@J-Ton i need luky loo to make more vedic text videos so i can talk with indiafriends in the comments

[@விஷ்ணு_கார்த்திக்]

@@J-TonNo we don't, and we're not pagan, Christians are pagan.

[@J-Ton]

@@விஷ்ணு_கார்த்திக் Yes you do and you misunderstand the very words you use (or are fine using them to mislead).

[@principleshipcoleoid8095]

Just because universe is pre determined does not mean your fate is not to do great things.

[@TemperedWambat]

Yeah he's misrepresenting determinism not everyone has that frame of mind. It's doesn't have to be a cope. Some people can perceive it as empowering.

[@Joe-Przybranowski]

It's liberating as a matter of fact. Easier to be mindful.

[@chaospacemarine8330]

"Hypocrite that you are, for you trust the chemicals in your brains to tell you that they are chemicals! Will you fight? Or will you perish like a dog?" : The Video

[@arsenal4444]

poetry

[@Ganerrr]

physicists when their deterministic (⇒ no free will) model is foiled by better physics

[@Ignas_]

@@methane1027 So you're saying it's determined by quantum physics, not just regular physics?

[@alexandersanchez9138]

@@Ignas_ The "collapse of the wave-function" is stochastic.

[@sanjacobs6261]

@@methane1027 Even if you consider true unpredictability and quantum randomness, that doesn't mean you are the one choosing. This still doesn't prove free will.

[@linuxramblingproductions8554]

Where is free will proven?

[@Ganerrr]

@@linuxramblingproductions8554 psychophysical harmony

[@alexandersanchez9138]

I remain a determinist. I never understood the argument: “your lack of freewill absolves you of responsibility.” It doesn’t; even if you don’t have magical control over matter, the system can still be pressured advantageously. At some point, we are lucky that there is air in the atmosphere, water in the oceans, and energy from the sun-without it we would die, and we had nothing to do with that success. Likewise, it’s good to remain grateful for your successes *without absolving yourself of responsibility.*

[@Thematic2177]

How can "the system" be "pressured" if you don't have control over matter?

[@alexandersanchez9138]

@@Thematic2177 It self-organizes to minimize energy loss. That ends up feeling like agents choosing a policy--and, at that level, the agents can exert pressure by introducing weights into a static evaluation function.

[@alexandersanchez9138]

@@zealy1369 Why? Who is the "you" you refer to? It makes sense to assign moral responsibility to the matter, even if you absolve moral responsibility for the "soul." That is, *your mind and body are not absolved of responsibility* precisely because they are physical. You can absolve the soul of moral responsibility, so long as you maintain the distinction from the mind.

[@alexandersanchez9138]

@@zealy1369 You're free to define "moral responsibility" as exactly that which is excluded by hard determinism. However, I'm trying to argue that you get something basically *exactly as good* for anything you'd want without freewill. You can recapture all of the essential properties of an intensional "moral" situation by looking at the associated extensional, ethical scenario. For this reason, I don't think the determinism/freewill debate is material or even that interesting. In particular, volcanoes don't have minds and so it doesn't make sense to give it a fine because it isn't going to change its behavior as a result. On the other hand, a person who commits a crime (ostensibly) has a mind, and so you can exert pressure to disincentivize the relevant behavior, etc. etc. As intelligent agents, part of an appropriate response to other agents' behavior is to update our own internal models of those other agents. That includes some kind of heuristic for a "morality" score. However, that's equally well described via an appropriate "ethical integrity" score. Not only am I unable to see the difference between a person with freewill and a person without, I can't even tell the difference between a person who believes in freewill and one who doesn't.

[@bennyredpilled5455]

Jay Dyer is laughing so hard right now

[@RealCyberCrime]

The nihilism in gen z is unbearable

[@6ujkyujhrbdfgjy5]

Free will was confusing for me to understand as an atheist too. I couldn't imagine why a God would give us the ability to question his own existence. It only makes sense to me now that I've read scripture and I've started to become religious. I suppose it's the ultimate test of our faith. There will always be challenging obstacles in our lives, but as long as we keep God in our heart through our Free Will, we can achieve great things

[@andrew66769]

Denominations have different spins on this. Some just believe we don't have a free will. Others believe God gave us a free will because God wants us to love him, and programming something to love you isn't truly love. Someone has to be able to not love you but still choose to. Once you really dive into all the different denominations there's basically one for any possible interpretation one could have/want.

[@user-or4ut2qi3q]

@@AustinTexasGardening get out of here, pesky Calvinist! Jesus died for the whole world, salvation is a free gift available to all who believe. Faith is a choice, and not a work. If a man is dangling from the edge of a cliff, it is not a work to take the hand which is reaching out to save you. Calvinism is a total perversion of the gospel. Why don't you just follow Jesus, instead of following Calvin? None of your references actually back up what you say. Salvation is the gift, not faith!

[@athianathian-reborn5664]

@@AustinTexasGardening you have a choice to believe or reject the gospel by faith. to believe Christ died for sins is enough to be saved through grace by faith. if you take the Calvinist standpoint you cannot be sure YOU didn't will yourself to faith and thus it's invalid and the Bible never talks about this distinction. Acts 16:29-31 Then he called for a light, ran in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas. 30 And he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” 31 So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.” anytime someone asks what to do to be saved the answer is BELIEVE. it's a choice and any other interpretation than what the bible says to be saved causes confusion, doubt, and that is not of God who makes it simple so children can be saved let alone grown men.

[@your-mom-irl]

@@athianathian-reborn5664 imagine being so annoying you decide to go around telling people they are going to hell because they don't really believe through real faith only fake forced faith lmao.

[@user-or4ut2qi3q]

@@andrew66769 and yet there is only one truth, most of the things that people dispute don't affect salvation, but Calvinists skate on very thin ice. I would not call a Calvinist a brother, and I would not have fellowship with them or enter their house/let them in mine, just as the Bible teaches us. The same as Mormons or Jehovah's witnesses. "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: for he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds." 2 John 1:9‭-‬11 "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us." 2 Thessalonians 3:6

[@tallyhoman1996]

As a Catholic, I believe our free will is real yet relatively small, and it's not merely our own will which comes into play but the many wills including the will of demons. Our greatest freedom is manifest when we surrender our will to the divine will, God who knows us and made us desires the best for us but we have to walk the path. The end of the journey is really also the beginning, so we need to put our trust in God and not worry.

[@athianathian-reborn5664]

Catholicism rather openly teaches works along with faith. you can't have both as how you're saved or you only have works or the law which can only condemn you, you don't get rewarded for following law and only get punished for breaking it. most Christians get grace wrong and either openly make works a part like Catholics or backload it saying to truly believe you need works after and surrender you life which is mixing discipleship with salvation. the demonic have much less power over you than you would believe, there's a reason they use lies and not outright force. it's good to follow God's wisdom for the right reasons but discipleship is very costly and it's wise to count the costs, the motives and not to make this about works as that's our natural state of religion

[@RolyTheHolyPaladin]

@@athianathian-reborn5664 this is a really underrated comment.

[@mojejaje2073]

Catholicism is based 🇻🇦Reject all other false churches that teach heresy

[@athianathian-reborn5664]

@@mojejaje2073 catholicism rejects christs imputed righteousness in favor of an infused righteousness which is replacing what saves with leaven of the pharisees, mix of works and grace. catholicism puts the tradition of man completely above man to the point their claim to fame is they have the church fathers as their fathers, NOT that they have the good news of christs death, burial and resurrection and believing that saves, purgatory is the biggest slap in christ's face to say you can pay for sin and be cleansed in fire like his blood is common. matthew 3:7-9 7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance: 9 And think not to say within yourselves, *We have Abraham to our father:* for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to *raise up children unto Abraham.* and before it's brought up, no John did not say to the most sin obsessed people in all of human history the pharisees to repent of sins but to repent of unbelief and change their mind, that definition of repenting is a work which is turning from evil. jonah 3:10 10 And God *saw their works, that they turned from their evil way;* and God *repented of the evil,* that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

[@_M_4]

Your life is like a sandbox. You can move around in it and shape some things, but your sandbox has limited space and is influenced by outside conditions. Thankfully, the internet was a big equalizer and makes everybody's sandbox bigger.

[@ZyroZoro]

Free will or no free will, you still control your own life.

[@samusaran7317]

😹

[@seth7838]

I read the title as "The REAL red-pill on free wifi!"

[@ncedwards1234]

Imagine not pulling the lever in the trolley problem because you forget responsibility is inherent to all response ability.

[@stewbeef8808]

I have heard you talk before about how the human brain/mind isn't actually well-equipped to understand reality. How do you square that with confidence in finding final answers to these these kinds of "ultimate questions?" I have no idea if I have free will or not. I don't even know if I can formulate a consistent definition of that idea, despite over a decade trying. How can I know or believe I have something or can do something if I don't even understand what that thing is? I have found that, the less I worry about raking myself over the coals over having objectively correct answers to the hardest philosophical questions in the human experience, the better my life actually goes. More friends, more family, more connection with my community, better satisfaction with my work, more spiritually alive, etc. The less I worry about having free will or not, the better things are for me.

[@xvindiex]

Ignorance is bliss

[@Refresh5406]

I noticed that you didn't offer a single biblical reference at all in defense of your beliefs. Theologically, libertarian free will inevitably leads to one of several possible conclusions, none of which are biblical or true at all: 1) Universalism (all will eventually freely choose God and His will remains untarnished) 2) Open theism / process theology (God doesn't actually know the future and/or changes, which is a functional form of...) 3) Atheism (the God of the Bible just can't exist, because if He did, He's neither omniscient nor omnipotent, due to the fact that He doesn't know the future and failed to achieve what he set out to achieve). The only coherent version of free will from a Christian perspective is the type of compatibilism that Jonathan Edwards, noted high Calvinist espoused, that we freely choose according to our strongest desire. That is the Calvinist view. It's not "fatalism," it's a fundamentally differnet thing. We do not determine the future, that has all been set in stone from the foundation of the universe by God. If we can change the future, we invalidate God's knowledge and functionally undo His existence. The common Arminian conception of "free will" is a blasphemous cope that strikes at very being of God and ought to be repented of. You can't believe in the Bible and deny that God is in full control of all things in His creation, and it's sin to deny that. Oh, also some free advice, your argument that "fatalism is a cope to not do anything" implies that fatalists would somehow believe that they have the choice not to. That is not the case. It's not an "excuse for inaction" they would believe that all of their actions are predetermined. If you want an actual argument against fatalism, then argue that it's an excuse for all bad behavior, which is a much more debatable point, not that it's an excuse to do nothing lol. Terrible argument, my man.

[@henlofren7321]

Exactly, Christianity is the peak of hard determinism and it's actually one of the best reasons to convert.

[@LukeSmithxyz]

God is sovereign and created the human will and agency and the entirely of history is the redemption of that will and the cooperation of it. Predestination (which is what the Bible teaches) is not the same as monergism (which is something that Lutherans and Calvinists invented and contradicts about every exhortation and parable of the Bible). Monergism replaced the redemptive Gospel and installed in its place with Catholic-inspired torture fan-fic where God damns himself to hell. For the exact same reasons that Calvinists denied the synergy of the divine and human will, they also denied the fusion of the divine and material in the Eucharist and sacraments, the divine and human nature of the Church itself and Apostolic Succession, giving rise to modern Protestant ecumenism. Chesteron described Calvinism as the "most non-Christian of Christian systems" because there is only one place it leads. They deny any cooperation between the material and spiritual, which culminates in abdicating all things spiritual. There's a reason that every generation of Calvinists gives birth to a generation of atheists. Note also that Calvin believed in free will. Read the Institutes. He just believed man lost it in the fall. So was God not sovereign back then? Was it "open theism" then and then God became sovereign when we sinned? We can't ask Calvin because he never ever gave a coherent definition free will or of anything, but misunderstood basic theological terminology and made a religion about it. (Note also Calvin denied the eternal generation of the Son because he misunderstood where he read Peter Lombard talk about it, and made a totally new Trinitarian theology because of it).

[@84Chadd]

Free will exists as an abstraction. From the perspective of our minds, we have free will. From the context of the universe, everything must follow the laws of physics and our perspective is part of that. It is just as valid to enforce morality, justice, responsibility, taking action etc. Human values and consequences still remain so nothing about how we need to behave changes. We will always demand consequences for undesirable actions. Making choices deconstructed is really just modeling and comparing different hypothetical actions and outcomes then selecting the perceived best outcome for our goals. All things that machines can do today. If physics is purely deterministic then so will be the outcome of that computation. If it also involves probability or randomness then so will the computation. The process of modeling and comparing hypothetical actions is basically the abstraction of free will. Justice deconstructed is a necessary consequence we apply to others to improve choices (modeling and comparing) going forward according to our morality. Even if that action was unpreventable in the context of physics, what matters morally is that it was preventable in the context of freewill. Preventable (in the context of freewill) deconstructed means that a choice (modeling and comparing) can be improved upon in similar situations going forward to avoid the undesirable outcome. Therefore, freewill is inescapable and everyone including your friend must still own their actions!

[@youtub-fj8mu]

well said

[@ichster3629]

At last, the final piece to the eternal motivation puzzle

[@sirzorg5728]

the fire in your soul that can drive you to anything.

[@sfsksasbs3]

we are all controlled by something greater: memes, the dna of the soul

[@tiagomiranda316]

your pfp is sick

[@videorelaxant2780]

Okay Jungian

[@ГригорийДолгушин-ц1р]

And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. Matthew 11:12

[@SimGunther]

Being free from something means you're confined by something else. That's life for you.

[@thetechfromheaven]

Ok degenerate.

[@exnihilonihilfit6316]

Hater of the law of identity. I'm so sorry you have nature. boohoo

[@HADESCROUNS]

Make a video explaining what made you go from atheist to a believer

[@chocolateneko9912]

There is a livestream clip of him talking about that, I'll link it

[@chocolateneko9912]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/i2q5mqZ5gquKg5I

[@mortrix9711]

@@chocolateneko9912 good luck linking on YT

[@chocolateneko9912]

@@mortrix9711 does it not work anymore?

[@Sever3dHead]

@@chocolateneko9912 nah

[@MangoKitty]

personally it doesnt matter if its all predetermined or not, because if it is then all this was gonna happen anyway, and if its not i better make the best of it, so its best to act as if its not

[@diegop.9461]

The fact that we 'think' that the 'correct' answer to a solvable-by-us situation is 100% on us to do 'right away' falls from cope to cognitive egotism. Obviously, this does not apply to all situations, but it is food for thought on this matter.

[@hammerain93]

I wasn't a hard determinist when I became atheist, but I was once I took psychedelics, and I still am. I don't sit around all day doing nothing because I feel the urges to do things and I would have to be an addict, loser, etc. to be stuck and frozen with no goals or future. So I never really gave up the determinism, and I feel it in my life all the time. If anything, it's helped me perceive myself as "lucky enough to have healthy motivations." It also helps me not pile up so much blame and credit on people who do bad/good things respectively. e.g. I don't think we should lock up murderers to punish them, we should lock them up so more people don't get killed.

[@godnyx117]

Another reason to lock them up is in hopes (cause as you can see, this didn't worked great) that other people will see that and be afraid to kill. Preventing more killers is as important as preventing the same person from killing.

[@hammerain93]

@@godnyx117 yes, deterrence is important. "You do X then you go to Y"

[@ΛάμψιςἈταξία]

@@godnyx117 I dont think prison is a deterrent for murder, maybe for theft it yes, but if that was the case there wouldn't ever be any murders ever again since the first people locked up, and the fact that there is a thrill about getting away with murder from some not because it causes harm to others but simply because it is illegal so it turns it into a sort of game, its something to consider also

[@godnyx117]

@@ΛάμψιςἈταξία It doesn't matter if people still do it or not. The most intelligent creature in the world is the most evil and sinister. Humans are murderers from our nature. Some of us just choose to control our urges and choose what we want to be. Even if murders were publicly tortured brutally and then killed as an example, there would still people that would keep killing and raping. Prisons are not useless.

[@hammerain93]

@Bob Duckington LOL

[@stuckmannen3876]

this is so true! i know a lot of people "trapped" in that sort of mindset (mainly evangelicals)... just waiting for the endtimes to come... while they sit in their room doing nothing with their lives... this video basically summarized very neatly what I have been thinking all this time. Thanks for sharing, God bless ☦

[@user-or4ut2qi3q]

But evangelicals are not just waiting, they go into the streets to preach to people and they hand out tracts. That is why they are called evangelical, because they evangelise. Not to mention missions and other charity work. They dedicate their lives to serving the Lord by spreading the gospel and helping people, is that doing nothing? What does doing something with your life look like to you?

[@cat_city2009]

You seem to be oversimplifying to avoid some uncomfortable truths about reality.

[@tv-pp]

Wym

[@thingsiplay]

Uncertainty Principle, particles popping in and out of existence by random, probably other existing dimensions, and the universe makes up only a few percentage of matter. We don't know so much about the universe, it would be a blunder to say we know for sure if its deterministic or not.

[@reinoob]

It's not pre determined if it's a chain reaction, it's illogical to think that a chain reaction is immutable when you consider a scope where the variables change all the time.

[@ncedwards1234]

Whether you believe you can or you believe you can't, you're right. Power of self-fulfilling prophecies. Perhaps even the basis of the placebo effect.

[@Twtgod]

Stumbling on this channel is one of the best thing to happen to me in the KZbin Universe. Greetings from Africa

[@axe2001]

Hope you stay there

[@Twtgod]

@@axe2001 stay where?

[@user49357]

@@Twtgod Hope you stay focused

[@Twtgod]

@@user49357 Absolutely that's why I have the name.

[@Twtgod]

@@axe2001 Racist much?

[@staxstirner]

Humans are controlled by their instincts desires and environment. This will not "justify" but affirm someone's mediocrity and someone else's creativity. Willing is a cope. The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. The only will is the will to power.

[@ihavenoname.4929]

Determinism and Freewill exist simultaneously.

[@linuxramblingproductions8554]

How

[@oinkmagoink9129]

We live in a paradox. Every truth is simultaneously a lie, every lie a partial truth

[@evangelium5376]

I've found that determinist philosophy isn't very good to begin with. It fails hard on the phenomenology aspect.

[@porky1118]

It's not a good philosophy. It's not a philosophical question, but a question of truth. Either the world is deterministic, or it isn't. I never heard about "phenomenology". It sounds like stuff, that cannot be explained using the deterministic rules we know. But non-determinism wouldn't help to explain this, either.

[@ssznajder]

I still believe in a kind of determinism or whatever. To me it makes the world and human behavior make more sense than any kind of spiritual explanation. Of course I have no proof for this, but it's what I believe.

[@TheGiantMidget]

Spinoza figured this problem out better than anyone i can think of. He was a hard determinist but he posited that we are all modes of gods attributes of thought and extension and that although we as modes are caused, god is not. God is infinite and therefore god is totally free. So there is a sort of free will but that free will is not on the level of the individual it's more universal. Spinoza said that a person can become more free by understanding the nature of god and in turn their own nature. By increasing our understanding we give ourselves more ways to think and through that we gain more freedom over ourselves

[@eucharistenjoyer]

As an ex-atheist who reverted to Catholicism I'm glad my family wasn't Calvinist. That level of determinism and messed up idea of salvation would bring me right back to atheism in no time.

[@ALBtheALBatross]

No will of man is outside God's will. Source: the Bible "So, God controls everything. How can He blame people for sinning?" Romans 9 walks through explaining someone in your position to God's position: Rom 9.19 *You will then say to me, Why does He yet find fault? For who has resisted His will?* Rom 9.20 Yes, rather, O man, who are you answering against God? Shall the thing formed say to the One forming it, Why did You make me like this? Rom 9.21 Or does not the potter have authority over the clay, out of the one lump to make one vessel to honor, and one to dishonor?

[@ALBtheALBatross]

Rom 9.15 For He said to Moses, "I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will pity whomever I will pity." Rom 9.16 So, then, it is not of the one willing, nor of the one running, but of the One showing mercy, of God.

[@cinemint]

I believe in hard determinism, and am a Christian. However, I do agree with what Luke says here - the fact of the matter is, free will is often misdefined. Your will is static and be, in theory, determined. However, you still act according to it. God is infinite, albeit stable. If your goal is to walk humbly with God, then you can predict and act according to his will with a great deal of security. Circumstances change, but our wills do not. Come to peace with your will and do the right thing. God gave us our wills so that we could image him. It is an inappropriate response to see this, somehow, as an excuse to throw your life away. This whole "free will vs predestination" thing is a modern debate and was not argued because these truths were universally understood in the days when early Christians spoke Hebrew and Greek fluently. Modern, European sensibilities have polluted the discussion and driven wedges between believers.

[@mathematicalninja2756]

I would argue that our own very existence is a testament to the fact that matter is just the surface level of the ocean of what universe has to offer.

[@Adam-kr7sw]

I think believing in determinism like you described does not have to be an excuse for laziness. Believing in world events being a chain reaction does not condemn you from being venturesome person. You can gaslight yourself into believing your life is pointless, OR quite the opposite.

[@_________________404]

It's more like an algorithm rather than a chemical reaction, the outcome and everything you do might be already predetermined, except that the algorithm has many different branches which either will or won't be executed depending on the actions you choose. Your actions can technically influence all things which are physically possible, you just have to choose the right actions in order for the algorithm to take you there.

[@Jay-kk3dv]

Remember the movie, Free Willy?

[@hyperthreaded]

It makes no sense to change your own behaviour based on whether or not free will exists. If you become a slacker in your own life because you learned (or became convinced) that free will doesn't exist, then you became a slacker in your own life because you learned (or became convinced) that free will doesn't exist, not because free will doesn't exist.

[@SIGSEGV1337]

Free will is theologically untenable, because it entails a lack of omnipotence on the part of God. You are responsible for your actions, but you are also powerless, destiny is out of your hands. Everything that has happened and that will happen has been determined and is known by God.

[@mskiptr]

I see no reason for free will to be incompatible with everything being determined. (let's assume that free will and God exist:) Our decisions (will) play out exactly according to our decisions. If you think that a future decision cannot be free if it's 'known' to someone, then think about the past. Past actions are already known, yet they were subject to free will. For an omniscient being (i.e. God) all of time is kinda like the past - assuming God is outside time. And omnipotence is even less of an issue. If God created people with free will, he would also refrain from interfering with our decisions - not because of a lack of omnipotence, but according to God's own will. This may seem like circular reasoning, but that's because I'm not trying to prove either. Instead, I want to show that this situation _isn't_ contradictory.

[@LukeSmithxyz]

To say that God cannot create free will entails a lack of omnipotence on the part of God. Also, foreknowledge/predestination is not the same, in fact, as nothing to do with determinism/monergism other than the fact that people who don't think about it confuse them. God knows the future and has even predestined it. Your foreseen agency is a part of that.

[@SIGSEGV1337]

@@mskiptr It is not a matter of knowing, it is a matter of your existence requiring God to create you as a prerequisite, and being created entails everything that you will do because this is inseparable from who you are. What you are suggesting is that God can create something and choose not to have power over it, but this is not possible because omnipotence is a property of God and cannot have exceptions or else what we are describing is not in fact God.

[@SIGSEGV1337]

@@LukeSmithxyz "To say that God cannot create free will entails a lack of omnipotence on the part of God." This is like saying that the fact God cannot create a square circle entails a lack of omnipotence. Things that are logically incoherent are outside the scope of omnipotence. "God knows the future and has even predestined it. Your foreseen agency is a part of that." If my agency is willed then it is not free.

[@mskiptr]

​@@SIGSEGV1337 I won't give you a proof that free will is logically sound, but it definitely isn't contradictory with God's omnipotence and I hope I'll manage to show that: Let's say God creates a being with free will. You're saying that any being God creates, includes within itself all its future actions and thus these actions have to be chosen by God during creation. The incorrect part is imo the assumption that beings have their actions somehow ingrained within them. I know this is how you would probably model that in philosophy, heavily influenced by set theory, but it really assumes that beings can be described using precise, mathematical models. That last assumption is the crux of the matter here. If free will could be modeled like that, it wouldn't be free will. That is, if there was a set of laws 'free will' follows, and it could be described with probability, a deterministic finite automaton, a Turing machine, or any other mathematical model, it would just be equivalent to some new laws of physics. On a related note, my reasoning assumes there can be things you can't model mathematically; things that don't follow concrete rules. (otherwise everything's just physics btw) Notice this _is different_ from logic itself not being correct. Oh, and the other thing: > What you are suggesting is that God can create something and choose not to have power over it No, you misunderstood me. God totally could violate our free will. (Then it wouldn't be free will anymore - because logic.) I was claiming that God chooses not to control us, and to let us act according to free will. Ironically, my argument here is best expressed with your own words. You're saying: > What you are suggesting is that God can create something and choose not to have power over it, but this is not possible because omnipotence is a property of God and cannot have exceptions or else what we are describing is not in fact God. and my response is: > This is like saying that the fact God cannot create a square circle entails a lack of omnipotence. Exactly. Free will by definition is not controlled by God. It would be logically unsound to claim that omnipotence only works within logic *and* that it still needs to control free will.

[@primepiplup]

My generative AI model predicted you’d make this video

[@Haydxn_P]

be stoic in places you cant control and active in the parts that you can

[@ministerofjoy]

What you dont get about determinism is that, being that the premise every single line of thinking is already determined, even the one you act uppon and conceide yourself as a premedited choice. Ask yourself how it can Not be determined by anyting else, how it would need to be detached from the works of the universe and its deterministic properties.

[@serenditymuse]

When I encounter believers that say "It's in God's hands" I usually suggest they go re-read and meditate on the Parable of Talents".

[@ianc8266]

Simplest way to phrase this: who cares whether your actions are predetermined when thinking as though they're not makes your life better?

[@yungefendi6480]

timing and accuracy to find this is CRAZY

[@degayify]

wow ! wow wow wow! big man of knowledge ! love form japan, okinawa. best video

[@cj548]

Not sure you understand what the word cope means. Thinking you have free will is cope not the opposite

[@10ahm01]

Either can be a cope depending on what one actually desires, but I guess I disagree with his generalization; I don't believe we have freewill even though I would have preferred if we did.

[@JDStone20]

People don't want respsonsiblity, responsibitity is hard.

[@rorynolan4426]

here's some esoteric insight for those who are interested. in tarot the devil card is synonymous with addiction. demons basically demand tithes in the form of dedications of energy - thats what a demon is, a force you keep going back to to pay a debt or a temptation that always causes you to become weakened that you can't stop doing, an addiction in other terms. being indebted to the devil or doing a deal with the devil means that people LOSE THEIR FREE WILL, and keep using or doing the thing that need to do without having the force and willpower needed to be able to choose to STOP. they've handed their willpower over to a demon/the devil which otherwise would have none. notice how many homeless people and addicts all become christians? the energy of jesus christ IS the energy of free will, thats why going to christ frees you from spiritual bondage and its why everyone who's really been in a tough place has needed to call on christ in order to begin making different choices / turn their lives around, always the result of making different choices. salvation means regaining a sense of free will, which is just the ability to make choices that support your own genuine wellbeing, which is gained through christ. free will is essentially the ability to make choices that successively and progressively put you in higher states of freedom and wellbeing. genuine wellbeing and sentiments of care for the self / knowing your own holiness and purity through christ ALWAYS spills over into how you treat others. the real creator of this universe is two things above all - unconditional love and choice/free will and everything in its original state is imbued with both qualities.

[@lorenzodhernandes]

It seems like you have more of a problem with how people use determinism than the concept itself.

[@Beebo]

I think that this is an interesting take on free will vs determinism. I think your justification of why free will does exist highlights an important aspect of consciousness. Let's suppose that the universe is indeed deterministic. This implies that the atoms in the universe operate in a deterministic manner and thus the neurons in your brain are also deterministic, and thus your behaviour is deterministic. I think this is the wrong way of looking at the problem. I think we should look at this problem from a top-down approach. Even though the atoms operate deterministically, that does not require the human believe in determinism because a human operates on a higher abstraction level than atoms. An example which highlights this fact is that we cannot micromanage every atom in our body. We cannot even micromanage each individual cell. We can only relay top-down commands down the hierarchy from our consciousness. Although our consciousness may fundamentally be deterministic because atoms are, it does not mean the high-level control needs to work under the assumption that itself is deterministic. I think it's counterproductive. Regardless of whether universe is or isn't deterministic, you're always worse of if you believe in it. Even if you do believe in it, you don't have any control over the mechanism which produces determinism in the universe. I think a good analogy to explain this is like a MacOS virtual machine running on a Windows PC. MacOS represents free will and Windows represents determinism. Even though the virtual machine (your brain) is running on a Windows PC base-layer (deterministic universe), it doesn't mean you have to operate on the same level. Fundamentally you still are, but your perception is that you're on Mac.

[@exnihilonihilfit6316]

Pragmatism is wrong. Pascal's wager is a bad method.

[@Red_Neck]

We don't have free will because the chemical reactions in our body are deterministic. Just like apples aren't red because the atoms that make up the apple aren't red. /s

[@me-fp3cg]

No, hard determinism doesn't lead to fatalism, humans still have the unique capacity to discern and act upon what's right even if it's painful, but this isn't actually "free will". What is the utility of hard determinism? It emphasizes mind-body monoism and cuts through the egoism inherent to belief that humans are the only material (read: actually existing) beings with an immortal soul. But, even if hard determinism absolutely led to fatalism there'd still be the problem of it being true, as true beliefs are not easy to exorcise even if doing so would be for good practical reasons.

[@wheresthesauce3886]

I could always easily accept the idea that plants were just a "bundle of verg complex chemical reactions," but I could never make he jump to animals.

[@porky1118]

Sounds like discrimination. Why do you set the border between plants and animals? What about mushrooms? They are evolutionary closer to animals than plants.

[@wheresthesauce3886]

@@porky1118 'cause I'm a bigot

[@vladimirzaytsev3284]

Even if there is no free will, it should have been invented.

[@audreymcknight]

don't really agree. lack of free will could justify mediocrity, but it could just as well justify doing great things. believing in a lack of free will /the big chain reaction is ultimately kind of inconsequential if you don't have any way of predicting the result, unless you just pat yourself on the back whenever time moves forward. it's a matter of self worth maybe

[@fredseekingbibleturth]

At first i thought this was going to be about Calvinism because Calvinists do not believe in free will. As a Non Calvinistic Christian I do believe in free will.

[@ncedwards1234]

Still seems like cause creates effect in reasonably predictable ways, it just so happens that one of those ways is that i consistently do what the fuck i want, and what i want is to do what's right. If that counts as determination, it's because i am indeed determined.

[@owen755]

The best argument against determinism I've heard is the analogy of the computer and the display. Humans input their choices with the computer (brain) and see the result on the display (vision). Something like an Artificial Intelligence doesn't have free will, it only consists of the display.

[@Ignas_]

But the brain is influenced by our senses. We experience the environment, and make choices based on those inputs, which changes the environment. It's an instantaneous feedback loop. Same way as an AI performs a calculation, then gets feedback on whether their results were right or wrong, and alters its behavior to be "better" in its environment.

[@owen755]

@@Ignas_ you missed the point. We're not an automaton.

[@alexandersanchez9138]

An AI has a simulated brain, which is operationally analogous to an organic brain. How can you prove that I am not an automaton? I claim to be one--with the illusion of (the illusion of) freewill.

[@owen755]

@@alexandersanchez9138 The difference between our current AI and us is self awareness. Yes our freewill is created by God, so you could technically call us an AI, but does that make our freewill any less real?

[@alexandersanchez9138]

@@owen755 I think you're conflating consciousness and freewill, which are basically entirely separate issues. To address your rhetorical question, I agree; I don't think who made some machine has any bearing on its properties. However, I'm not saying we don't have freewill *because* we are an AI--in fact, I think the comparison with AI is basically a non sequitur.

[@HCaetano]

So much content to consoom!

[@old_account189]

People justify their sins by blaming it on predetermined outcomes etc... They can be idiots and whatnot, they dont even try.

[@mitya]

In short: praying for winning the lottery won't help if you're not buying a ticket.

[@BitterMonday]

Sometimes its hard to fathom a human who knows so little can speak so much

[@gulaschnikov5335]

No logical argument in favor of free will in this video.. still searching.. but it's mostly always the same.

[@Femyoz]

I still believe in some level of fatalism caused by nature and nurture, as our ultimate outcomes are already heavily skewed by default, however I'm also a utilitarian, meaning I believe in maximizing positive outcomes, which requires me to act as an interventionist in the world, an inevitable outcome of my worldview. I believe that everything will happen, has already happened, and is currently happening all at once on a 4th dimensional axis depending on your vantage point, but that I have the ability to control what this axis looks like for me to an extent. Even if these outcomes have ultimately been determined, some of them are still contingent upon my intervention, something that I still actively have to work for.

[@ezforsaken]

What number is larger? The amount of atoms in the universe or the amount of times Luke said 'like' in this video?

[@ArniesTech]

Thanks to chemicals, God, Aliens, Richard Stallman etc. I am financially Independent with 11 real estate properties at age 31 and I can pursue my Hobby which is Tech here on the interwebs having a fantastic positive and supporting community. 🙏

[@gjsb6wfg995]

You have no control over the movement of time, but you do have control of where you're moving towards.

[@laughingvampire7555]

If you believe everything is matter is called Materialism or Physicalism. And reality isn't deterministic, just ask any physicist about it, it isn't, reality is undeterministic and free will exists, thinking that free will doesn't exist because everything is matter is a jump to conclusions that ignores multiple layers, is not even an edgy idea, is an old idea of positivism in the 1800s.

[@KainiaKaria]

Because someone is free to say and or do a thing does not mean that it serves their freedoms and the freedoms of others. People tend to forget about how personal responsibility plays a role in freedom. All because one finds redemption does not mean that what has been said or even done is forgotten. You of all will remember that for the rest of your life. So often do people also give account of their crimes. People move on after mistreating you. They’re not sitting up in a room somewhere thinking about you. Most of the time they move on and live perfectly fine after doing you dirty. It’s time you release yourself from the shackles of waiting for someone to regret how they treated you. Whoever has no rule over his own spirit is like a city broken down, without walls. The wise understand this and thus hold restraint on their words and their actions. Krishna asked what is action and what is inaction? This very question has confused sages. The true nature of action is difficult for many to grasp. The love of wisdom is surely greater than the love of material things. To be around those who espouse great and profound wisdom of the One. We all must understand what is action and what is inaction, and what kind of action should be avoided. The wise see that there is action in the midst of inaction and inaction in the midst of action. Just take note of how pithy that is. Where was stuff of this nature in my life? For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Those are words of an extremely wise man. It is funny how people don’t listen to wisdom. People act and or speak with little to no consideration for others and you see how quickly freedom is cast to the wayside. How quickly wisdom is forgotten. People are far too interested in sniffing their own farts and eating their own poop. Both works of a sick and depraved mind. People lean on their own understanding of things for which they lack understanding on. That is very much a condemnation of people. Krishna said that one is understood to be in full knowledge whose every act is devoid of desire for sense gratification. He is said by sages to be a worker whose fruitive action is burned up in the fire of perfect knowledge. Abandoning all attachment to the results of his activities, ever satisfied and independent, he performs no fruitive action, although engaged in all kinds of undertakings. You would be surprised by how often people don’t take stuff like this seriously. They would not know of it unless they spent time reading it.

[@networkmuscle6824]

Next video in 6 months.

[@bbsara0146]

I agree that everything is pre determined. and it just so happens that my pre determined route is to become rich and successful

[@cherubin7th]

Free will doesn't mean randomness. It could be itself deterministic. Like I would say yes to the cake. Doesn't mean my will is not free, I just like cake. But I will say no to some type of cakes that I don't like.

[@your-mom-irl]

This is like saying a motor has free will because although the gears always turn in the same way depending on how much gas you burn, it's still free will because the gears "like" turning like that or something

[@fallout_jesus]

The self can be an illusion and your choices still matter. no paradox. Its the difference between intention and accident when the outcome is the same, like hitting some npc with your camry.

[@Swenthorian]

I actually misread the title as "The REAL Red-Pill on Free *Wifi*", and was expecting a talk on how most free WiFi hotspots are stealing our data or something, lol.

[@nathanfranck5822]

I've led my life for the last 8 years with this concept - there are around 10 points in your life where you're going to have a big decision that will change your life and the lives of others forever. The rest of life is training for those moments - to get stronger, smarter, more knowledgable, more attentive, more kind - so that you will recognize these moments when they occur and be able to act on them in the right way. Before I was in a basement rental alone, now I'm living in my own house with my wife and kid, close to my parents and inlaws. So it's worked out well for me

[@exnihilonihilfit6316]

that's such b.s.

[@nathanfranck5822]

@@exnihilonihilfit6316Life is some combo of Luck and Attentiveness IDK just my personal experience

[@nathanfranck5822]

@@exnihilonihilfit6316 Whats your counter idea?

[@levifig]

The irony is that Calvin (or Martin Luther, more particularly, since he's the one that wrote the book on Free Will :P) never taught fatalism or the abscense of free will. What they taught was about man's inability to save themselves, needing God's initiative for that. They also taught that you have free will when it comes to your operating procedures in this world/life, outside of salvation, both before and after redemption. It's actually a cool and deep concept, and nothing to do with how Calvinism is usually characterized, even in evangelical circles. What they emphasized was God's sovereignty over all things, space and time, not God's predeterminism on all things. The teaching is God CAN determine everything, not so much that He does determine everything… outside of salvation (i.e. monergism). Thank you for sharing your thoughts! 🙏

[@Optimus6128]

We should see it as a cope and understand the struggle behind cope, not just saying "man do the thing, take the responsibility". People reach dead ends so they have to cope with such ideas. Certain people with certain personality traits or difficulties end up being attracted to this idea of the lack of free will. But also "you have a purpose, you are here for a reason" is another cope. It's a positive cope. We don't even call it cope, it's a positive thought to keep you get going. It's not proven anyway that we are here for a reason, it's a belief. But all of these are things we say to hold in our life. I don't have disregard for people who don't believe in free will. Or black pillers. They are struggling with life so they have to invent or attach themselves into something as everything else feels like a deadend. Also some people believe the "lack of free will" idea could lead to some compassion. Although I struggle with the word "compassion" because usually it's associated with certain emotionality responses. But I try sometimes to do something else. I look at someone who behaves irrationally and usually we are like "Why is this person doing that? If he just did what I told him he would have solved all his issues". But I try now to see it like "If I had his brain and mind and experiences, a save state (like in emulators) of his current state of mind, I would have done exactly the same I think I wouldn't". Kinda like lack of free-will to be honest, kinda like if I was in his entire state molecule by molecule, psychologically, biologically, past experiences and memories, the very next move would be the same as what he would do. We look at people we don't understand from our own perspective, but we have a different upbringing, mind, traits, and more variables. Of course we find what someone else does irrational and stupid. But what if we were THEM? (That's how I understand what some proponents of lack of free-will call as compassion).

[@chaseopsahl]

Calvinists aren't fatalists. Hyper-calvinists are. Brought to you by a Calvinist. I do appreciate this take against fatalism though, it does lead to severe apathy and inaction. "God has a plan for this universe but his plan involves you" is 100% right on the nail.

[@db1777]

No free will doesn't necessarily mean no choice. Having no free will means not being able to make choices without repercussions. Basically cause and effect, every choice you make will have a rebounding effect whether good or bad that you will have to face. Edit: To sum it up, we have no control over the outcome of our decisions not that we have no decision.

[@Thematic2177]

If you have the ability to make choice, then you have free will. Consequences are external and irrelevant to this discussion.

[@your-mom-irl]

I dunno that sounds like a bunch of compatibilist cope

[@evangelium5376]

Free will isn't about outcomes, it's about what constitutes an act in itself.

[@db1777]

@thematic2177 Given the ability foresight, wouldn't knowing the possible outcome of a decision sway your decision making? Therefore doesn't the consequence of an action influence ones free will decision-making aka cause and effect?

[@Sever3dHead]

I wonder whether atheism and depression correlate.

[@chocolateneko9912]

Would make a lot of sense if they do

[@rajinfootonchuriquen]

Bro, even if you are an atheist, you can be a deterministic if you believe in quantum physics