Levels of the Will
[Thanks to Gerd Altmann]
To introduce this topic, I’d like to give an illustration – I once read about a woman who was a shopping addict. Completely unable to control herself and driven to desperation, she decided to freeze her credit card in a block of ice to force herself to stop spending. I like this example because it’s so extreme and shows so nicely the division between the parts or levels of the will. On one hand, she wanted to stop. On the other, she could not. On the other, she did have enough will to do a little thing (freeze her card in ice), even though she knew this meant that she had effectively stopped her desire from running rampant, as another part of her will would like. If she wanted to control herself, why could she not control herself without resorting to some means outside herself?
Now we do this in smaller examples too, as when we pay for gym membership or sign up for a class because we can’t compel ourselves on our own to get off our lazy asses or put our minds to work.
What if someone wants to believe, with all his heart, but can’t/doesn’t?
Rom 7:15-24 feeling guilty, even hating yourself and what you’re doing, and yet still not being able to stop. Now the reason people don’t do evil things is because it makes them feel too guilty that it’s not worth it, but we see in this that this isn’t completely true, or that we’re missing something here.
What do we say about atheists who want to believe in God and even admire people of faith, but can’t believe? What does this say about their wills, and about human will?
Wanting to sin but not being able to (split will). Pushing a button so that you never sin.
Levels of Free Will: We can rank choices by how much free will is involved. This could be a fruitful exercise.
I'd like to note that I haven't based this ranking on how much self-control the person actually has, but how little they can be blamed. So it may well be that a person who's a crack addict has extremely little control over their addiction, but I would say this person is more at fault than a bipolar person who gives into their manic rages.
level -9: being under the influence of some drug, hormone or bodily ailment, resulting in a fuzzy mind. This is the 1 level where I think the person actually has so little free will as to be exempt from blame. (EX: a drunk driver [but I'd like to note that the decision to get drunk in the first place is a level 0 {ie, neutral} decision])
level -8: being under the influence of some drug, hormone or bodily ailment, resulting in a fractured mind (that is, the person can think perfectly clearly about some things, but another part of their mind is compelled to believe whatever their brain is telling them. (EX: a schizophrenic who believes their hallucinations)
level -7: loving somebody; having certain religious, political or philosophical beliefs (This doesn't mean, however, that one cannot be open-minded and willing and eager to learn from everything and everyone. Whether you will be persuaded or not, though, is a different matter, and what I'm talking about here.)
level -6: having some natural capacity or incapacity due to temperament or brain structure/chemistry (EX: homosexuality; being perpetually depressed, being shy; being resilient)
level -5: as in level -7, being under the influence of some external brain-altering substance, but still retaining a sound mind with which to think clearly (EX: I read about a man who started looking at child porn after developing a brain tumor. The tumor was removed and his perversion went away.)
level -4: cultural influences that are difficult to debate with due to a lack of information or alternate paradigm to think about it with (performing genital mutilation on your daughter because you think it's good for her, becoming a farmer or warrior because that's what you've been taught and pretty much the only thing you know) (cf level 0)
level -3 akratic behaviors developed over time from bad habits, that is, in this case you were the external agent that changed your own brain chemistry (EX: gluttony, addictions)
level -2: akratic behavior due to bodily cravings (premarital sex, getting sloppy in your work because you're getting burned out)
level -1: personality flaws (being a pessimist, caring too much about others' opinions)
level 0: things such as deciding to brush your teeth; start a certain career; doing the right thing, even under duress (like at gunpoint); choosing sides in a debate with ir/rational thinking (EX: being brainwashed by communist propaganda or a prosperity gospel televangelist)
Being thrown into life.
What about not being able to choose who we fall in love with? Nor do we choose our reactions. It’s only natural to have certain reactions to certain instigators. If we follow our nature, is this a violation of free will? But if we could make up our reactions, then wouldn’t everything be arbitrary? Then everything would lack meaning. Also, there would be no differentiation/variety/diversity. Now you could make it so that you have a happy reaction towards everything (but 3rd, this would also go against nature. It’s a great logical wrong for everything to warrant the same reaction), but this makes everything meaningless. Truly, this would be a form of ignorant bliss. It could even lead to disrespect (imagine, for example, appreciating being raped) and then what would be the point of having different kinds of relationships if you could have sex with everyone? (What, for example, would be the point of having parents if you could have sex with them?) Meaning comes from restriction. Meaning comes from order, and order is a type of restriction. Also, fun comes from restriction (rules). Games are played by rules. But restriction means particulars. It means going from the unified abstract to the divided concrete.
Why is it that people can't act unless their emotions are engaged? Why can't reason act on its own? Then when we are reasonable and control our emotions, what's going on there?
Wanting to forgive yourself but being unable to do so. This is a more interesting question than wanting to forgive someone else but being unable to do so. In the latter, it's arguable whether you really want to forgive or not. In the former, it's taken for granted that you really do, since we all love ourselves above others.
Now we do this in smaller examples too, as when we pay for gym membership or sign up for a class because we can’t compel ourselves on our own to get off our lazy asses or put our minds to work.
What if someone wants to believe, with all his heart, but can’t/doesn’t?
Rom 7:15-24 feeling guilty, even hating yourself and what you’re doing, and yet still not being able to stop. Now the reason people don’t do evil things is because it makes them feel too guilty that it’s not worth it, but we see in this that this isn’t completely true, or that we’re missing something here.
What do we say about atheists who want to believe in God and even admire people of faith, but can’t believe? What does this say about their wills, and about human will?
Wanting to sin but not being able to (split will). Pushing a button so that you never sin.
Levels of Free Will: We can rank choices by how much free will is involved. This could be a fruitful exercise.
I'd like to note that I haven't based this ranking on how much self-control the person actually has, but how little they can be blamed. So it may well be that a person who's a crack addict has extremely little control over their addiction, but I would say this person is more at fault than a bipolar person who gives into their manic rages.
level -9: being under the influence of some drug, hormone or bodily ailment, resulting in a fuzzy mind. This is the 1 level where I think the person actually has so little free will as to be exempt from blame. (EX: a drunk driver [but I'd like to note that the decision to get drunk in the first place is a level 0 {ie, neutral} decision])
level -8: being under the influence of some drug, hormone or bodily ailment, resulting in a fractured mind (that is, the person can think perfectly clearly about some things, but another part of their mind is compelled to believe whatever their brain is telling them. (EX: a schizophrenic who believes their hallucinations)
level -7: loving somebody; having certain religious, political or philosophical beliefs (This doesn't mean, however, that one cannot be open-minded and willing and eager to learn from everything and everyone. Whether you will be persuaded or not, though, is a different matter, and what I'm talking about here.)
level -6: having some natural capacity or incapacity due to temperament or brain structure/chemistry (EX: homosexuality; being perpetually depressed, being shy; being resilient)
level -5: as in level -7, being under the influence of some external brain-altering substance, but still retaining a sound mind with which to think clearly (EX: I read about a man who started looking at child porn after developing a brain tumor. The tumor was removed and his perversion went away.)
level -4: cultural influences that are difficult to debate with due to a lack of information or alternate paradigm to think about it with (performing genital mutilation on your daughter because you think it's good for her, becoming a farmer or warrior because that's what you've been taught and pretty much the only thing you know) (cf level 0)
level -3 akratic behaviors developed over time from bad habits, that is, in this case you were the external agent that changed your own brain chemistry (EX: gluttony, addictions)
level -2: akratic behavior due to bodily cravings (premarital sex, getting sloppy in your work because you're getting burned out)
level -1: personality flaws (being a pessimist, caring too much about others' opinions)
level 0: things such as deciding to brush your teeth; start a certain career; doing the right thing, even under duress (like at gunpoint); choosing sides in a debate with ir/rational thinking (EX: being brainwashed by communist propaganda or a prosperity gospel televangelist)
Being thrown into life.
What about not being able to choose who we fall in love with? Nor do we choose our reactions. It’s only natural to have certain reactions to certain instigators. If we follow our nature, is this a violation of free will? But if we could make up our reactions, then wouldn’t everything be arbitrary? Then everything would lack meaning. Also, there would be no differentiation/variety/diversity. Now you could make it so that you have a happy reaction towards everything (but 3rd, this would also go against nature. It’s a great logical wrong for everything to warrant the same reaction), but this makes everything meaningless. Truly, this would be a form of ignorant bliss. It could even lead to disrespect (imagine, for example, appreciating being raped) and then what would be the point of having different kinds of relationships if you could have sex with everyone? (What, for example, would be the point of having parents if you could have sex with them?) Meaning comes from restriction. Meaning comes from order, and order is a type of restriction. Also, fun comes from restriction (rules). Games are played by rules. But restriction means particulars. It means going from the unified abstract to the divided concrete.
Why is it that people can't act unless their emotions are engaged? Why can't reason act on its own? Then when we are reasonable and control our emotions, what's going on there?
Wanting to forgive yourself but being unable to do so. This is a more interesting question than wanting to forgive someone else but being unable to do so. In the latter, it's arguable whether you really want to forgive or not. In the former, it's taken for granted that you really do, since we all love ourselves above others.
