Allow me, as an atheist, to refute Barney’s characterization: The self resides in the mind (not in an imaginary “soul”), and the evolution of said mind allowed the development of free will, expanding human action beyond instinct.
The Laws of Physics, however, have yet to be repealed.
I routinely enjoy Barney&Frank. But I find this one both confusing and rather out of character (OOC).
As an atheist, I see the question of free will as a religious uncertainty. As in, would or could a theoretical deity allow free will?
But I think that there is no deity, so the question is moot. So, humans have free will by not being controlled by any outside powers.
So when Barney says “I have been drawn to the atheistic concept of the non-existence of free will and that man is hopelessly compelled by instinct and the laws of physics”, that makes no sense to me.
It is the opposite. Free will is automatic if there is no deistic power causing or futurally-predicting actions.
If Weingarten intends to say that biology and chemistry, etc are all that drives us (with no deity), I suggest this argument fails.
I claim to have free will in some situations. Let’s say I am choosing to plant corn or beans in a garden. Flip a coin. BUT, I will negate the coin flip if it comes up corn because I want beans because I decided THAT before the coin flip.
A better example: I look in my freezer and see shrimp, pork, beef, chicken, bacon, and lamb. I roll a die. I decide to have pork without looking at the die. What if I chose the pork because it was time to use up the bok choy for a stir fry?
That’s a judgement call based on observable facts about the condition of the bok choy. Is my evaluation of the condition of the bok choy somehow forced on me?
That strip was just wrong about free will and I am rather surprised about it…
gammaguy over 5 years ago
“Laws are made to be broken.”
And noses?
cdward over 5 years ago
Those who thin they are helplessly compelled by instinct and the laws of physics need more art and music in their lives.
Cozmik Cowboy over 5 years ago
Allow me, as an atheist, to refute Barney’s characterization: The self resides in the mind (not in an imaginary “soul”), and the evolution of said mind allowed the development of free will, expanding human action beyond instinct.
The Laws of Physics, however, have yet to be repealed.
scaeva Premium Member over 5 years ago
No, he’s thinking you need a good boot to the head.
Stephen Gilberg over 5 years ago
I believe in limited free will for humans. There might be aliens with freer will than ours.
Night-Gaunt49[Bozo is Boffo] over 5 years ago
Evolution is a huge part of it. Though we have the least amount of programming. But we still have it as intergal to our operations.
Hamady Sack Premium Member over 5 years ago
Beautiful color work today.
MarkSpencer1 over 5 years ago
I routinely enjoy Barney&Frank. But I find this one both confusing and rather out of character (OOC).
As an atheist, I see the question of free will as a religious uncertainty. As in, would or could a theoretical deity allow free will?
But I think that there is no deity, so the question is moot. So, humans have free will by not being controlled by any outside powers.
So when Barney says “I have been drawn to the atheistic concept of the non-existence of free will and that man is hopelessly compelled by instinct and the laws of physics”, that makes no sense to me.
It is the opposite. Free will is automatic if there is no deistic power causing or futurally-predicting actions.
If Weingarten intends to say that biology and chemistry, etc are all that drives us (with no deity), I suggest this argument fails.
I claim to have free will in some situations. Let’s say I am choosing to plant corn or beans in a garden. Flip a coin. BUT, I will negate the coin flip if it comes up corn because I want beans because I decided THAT before the coin flip.
A better example: I look in my freezer and see shrimp, pork, beef, chicken, bacon, and lamb. I roll a die. I decide to have pork without looking at the die. What if I chose the pork because it was time to use up the bok choy for a stir fry?
That’s a judgement call based on observable facts about the condition of the bok choy. Is my evaluation of the condition of the bok choy somehow forced on me?
That strip was just wrong about free will and I am rather surprised about it…