Did something I am now learning I shouldn't have done - Looked into Free Will.

[CommanderSouth]

So, I like tech news, among my sites is ArsTechnica.  Yesterday I stumbled on to this gem (link Determinism Vs Free Will)

Got to reading it, but now my anxiety is ramping up.  Which is bad because I have GAD and Depression.  I'm on meds, but I don't like how I'm feeling.  I now can't shake the feeling of the determinist view being right.  But if that were true (which I am mentally resisting), there is no ME to begin with.  I'm just the flame alight from the candle of my body.  Thankfully in one breath, I understand that I am a spirit in a body.  Eventually they'll be united perfectly, and fill the measure of their calling, or however the saying goes.  While I GET that, I don't feel it.  I got into reading the Libet experiments which basically say about 500 milliseconds before a person was making a choice to move their hand, their brain was already ramping up for it (readiness potential).  Though on the other hand I also read that if you read that data through a different filter, you get it lining up with when participants were saying they were making the decision.

All of this is to say, I really just want to talk about ways we are meant to act, and not be acted upon.  Because it's interesting to me, after having some good breakthroughs in the last month with my testimony, I feel like I'm being hit in the innermost part of my being, that is to say, MY BEING ITSELF.  I wonder if this is the misery that Satan wants for us, he is disembodied, perhaps his anguish is not having a full sense of self.  And being denied this, wants to take it from us, if he can.  In any event, I have been thinking about the verse about being able to act, and not be acted upon.  I've been thinking about the whole crux of the plan being the ability to chose.  And that is where my fear is, that I have no ability to choose.  That I AM just reacting to stimuli, even if it is a trillion small ones.  And in that way, I am not.  So I don't expect therapy (though I hope this process is therapeutic).  But what are some thought processes you guys have when dealing with this?  

If I ponder it more, I do realize we are uniquely equipped to deal with this problem.  Our self, the intelligence that is "us" is co eternal with God, which makes sense.  It is also co eternal with truth, whatever it is.  These things being the case, our spirit has agency, it is the most fundamental gift we have, and what Satan wanted to take.  It is also in a sense, the only thing we can give God that he doesn't have.  We can hand over US to him.  

This makes sense, but I'm having a hard time "feeling so now" it's like the flavor of the jalapeño of secularism is drowning the perfect mildness of the gospel.  Ironic I can fire off all these nice gospel phrases and talk references :D. 

[zil2]

1 hour ago, CommanderSouth said:

after having some good breakthroughs in the last month with my testimony, I feel like I'm being hit in the innermost part of my being

This is one of Satan's tactics.  My recommendation to you is:

• Stop reading (at least for now) the site (and similar sites) that caused the problem.
• Read the Book of Mormon.  Focus on Christ.
• Pray.  Bear your testimony to God.  Tell him your problem.  Ask him for help to overcome these doubts.  Ask him to guide you in what to do next.

Sure, we can reassure you and remind you of the truth, but our reassurances are nowhere near as powerful as the witness and comfort of the Holy Ghost.  Seek that.

If it helps, note the evidence - reading whatever you read and dwelling on it is causing you fear, sorrow, and confusion.  Satan is the author of those things.  Ergo, Satan is the one promoting the determinist view (which really sounds exactly like his plan).  Tell him to get lost.

[CommanderSouth]

55 minutes ago, zil2 said:

This is one of Satan's tactics.  My recommendation to you is:

• Stop reading (at least for now) the site (and similar sites) that caused the problem.
• Read the Book of Mormon.  Focus on Christ.
• Pray.  Bear your testimony to God.  Tell him your problem.  Ask him for help to overcome these doubts.  Ask him to guide you in what to do next.

Sure, we can reassure you and remind you of the truth, but our reassurances are nowhere near as powerful as the witness and comfort of the Holy Ghost.  Seek that.

If it helps, note the evidence - reading whatever you read and dwelling on it is causing you fear, sorrow, and confusion.  Satan is the author of those things.  Ergo, Satan is the one promoting the determinist view (which really sounds exactly like his plan).  Tell him to get lost.

This of course is the delicious irony.  I understand what you are saying, but in no way feel it.  I'm probably going to take refuge in the fact that I can believe something without knowing it, and believing it is enough to drive my actions.

I'm going to have to believe I have free will, even if I don't, else I'm just going to atrophy. And my hope is that in doing so will find my way out of this pit of despair (to borrow something from a movie).  I didn't worry about what atheists believed yesterday, why should I today. (And yes, I know this is an unfair generalization, but it suits this).

[CommanderSouth]

And if I don't have free will, I can't do anything about it  

[zil2]

30 minutes ago, CommanderSouth said:

pit of despair

Again, Satan's tool.  Open the Book of Mormon.  Read about Christ.  Pray - I was serious when I said to bear your testimony to God.  That may sound like a strange thing to do, but in my experience, it is immensely powerful, bringing the Spirit in strongly, and where the Spirit is, there is light, and where there is light, one can perceive the truth.  If something in you is resisting this course, stop reading and get on your knees already!  Use brute force if needed.

[laronius]

Whenever we speak of scientific facts we are really just speaking about observations that SO FAR appear consistent. This doesn't mean science is just guess work. Scientists probably get a great many things right. If that were not so God would not have told us to gain a knowledge of these things. But what it does mean is that every scientific fact, unless revealed by God, is restricted to man's experience and comprehension. Jesus did not seem to be bound by certain scientific laws during his mortal ministry. So whenever you encounter science that seems convincing, respect the science but leave room for God.

Having said that, concerning the argument that is being made concerning determinism, the author points out that our prefrontal cortex is shaped, while we are young, by an environment that we generally don't have much control over and as such our decision making is controlled by factors outside of our own choosing. While it's true that our physical bodies and our upbringing can have great influence upon us, the fact remains that we are surrounded by evidence/people who turn out completely different from what their environment would seem to dictate. People with good backgrounds going bad and vice versa. Siblings growing up in the same environment but turning out totally different from one another. The author's argument, while sounding logical, does not in any way reflect reality. That's why it is so hard to believe because everything in life, whether we can explain it or not, says it simply is not true. 

[CommanderSouth]

37 minutes ago, laronius said:

Whenever we speak of scientific facts we are really just speaking about observations that SO FAR appear consistent. This doesn't mean science is just guess work. Scientists probably get a great many things right. If that were not so God would not have told us to gain a knowledge of these things. But what it does mean is that every scientific fact, unless revealed by God, is restricted to man's experience and comprehension. Jesus did not seem to be bound by certain scientific laws during his mortal ministry. So whenever you encounter science that seems convincing, respect the science but leave room for God.

Having said that, concerning the argument that is being made concerning determinism, the author points out that our prefrontal cortex is shaped, while we are young, by an environment that we generally don't have much control over and as such our decision making is controlled by factors outside of our own choosing. While it's true that our physical bodies and our upbringing can have great influence upon us, the fact remains that we are surrounded by evidence/people who turn out completely different from what their environment would seem to dictate. People with good backgrounds going bad and vice versa. Siblings growing up in the same environment but turning out totally different from one another. The author's argument, while sounding logical, does not in any way reflect reality. That's why it is so hard to believe because everything in life, whether we can explain it or not, says it simply is not true. 

And what's funny to me, I have 0 qualms leaving 95% + of things to determinism.  I know I'll eat salad if that's what's in the fridge.  I know I'll walk without thinking about it.  I understand that habit and homeostasis in my body drive most of my decisions.  The place where I find the issue is killing me is the idea that the last 5% is also out of my control.  The idea that I have no choice.  That even when I try to put those odds in my favor by only stocking salad in the fridge, that, well, I never could have done anything different.

[laronius]

1 hour ago, CommanderSouth said:

 The idea that I have no choice.  

The problem is not the last 5% but the first 1%. The moment you no longer feel you have a choice you are being acted upon. 2 Nephi 2 states that opposition (competing choices) are not only necessary for God's plan but necessary for existence, period. Without choice we are not. I guess you just have to choose between God's wisdom and man's wisdom. 

[JohnsonJones]

11 hours ago, CommanderSouth said:

So, I like tech news, among my sites is ArsTechnica.  Yesterday I stumbled on to this gem (link Determinism Vs Free Will)

Got to reading it, but now my anxiety is ramping up.  Which is bad because I have GAD and Depression.  I'm on meds, but I don't like how I'm feeling.  I now can't shake the feeling of the determinist view being right.  But if that were true (which I am mentally resisting), there is no ME to begin with.  I'm just the flame alight from the candle of my body.  Thankfully in one breath, I understand that I am a spirit in a body.  Eventually they'll be united perfectly, and fill the measure of their calling, or however the saying goes.  While I GET that, I don't feel it.  I got into reading the Libet experiments which basically say about 500 milliseconds before a person was making a choice to move their hand, their brain was already ramping up for it (readiness potential).  Though on the other hand I also read that if you read that data through a different filter, you get it lining up with when participants were saying they were making the decision.

All of this is to say, I really just want to talk about ways we are meant to act, and not be acted upon.  Because it's interesting to me, after having some good breakthroughs in the last month with my testimony, I feel like I'm being hit in the innermost part of my being, that is to say, MY BEING ITSELF.  I wonder if this is the misery that Satan wants for us, he is disembodied, perhaps his anguish is not having a full sense of self.  And being denied this, wants to take it from us, if he can.  In any event, I have been thinking about the verse about being able to act, and not be acted upon.  I've been thinking about the whole crux of the plan being the ability to chose.  And that is where my fear is, that I have no ability to choose.  That I AM just reacting to stimuli, even if it is a trillion small ones.  And in that way, I am not.  So I don't expect therapy (though I hope this process is therapeutic).  But what are some thought processes you guys have when dealing with this?  

If I ponder it more, I do realize we are uniquely equipped to deal with this problem.  Our self, the intelligence that is "us" is co eternal with God, which makes sense.  It is also co eternal with truth, whatever it is.  These things being the case, our spirit has agency, it is the most fundamental gift we have, and what Satan wanted to take.  It is also in a sense, the only thing we can give God that he doesn't have.  We can hand over US to him.  

This makes sense, but I'm having a hard time "feeling so now" it's like the flavor of the jalapeño of secularism is drowning the perfect mildness of the gospel.  Ironic I can fire off all these nice gospel phrases and talk references :D. 

So, what is interesting is that Sapolsky isn't necessarily saying we don't have free will.  What he is saying is that our brain doesn't function in a way that permits us to have free will.  That, if looking at it biologically, we are merely responding to our environment.

Mitchell of course looks at it from the viewpoint that Sapolsky is a proponent of reforming the Criminal Justice System, and thus, arguing backwards from the idea that criminals are not responsible for their actions and thus their punishments are unjust and our way of looking at that should be reformed.

The interesting thing about both is that a conclusion can be drawn that there is something more that gives us our free will.  In Sapolsky's case, that there is something beyond our biology that is causing us to be able to make choices and decisions. 

I suppose we could look at it in the way that the brain is more of a CPU or a processor for something else.  It is interacting with something that enables it to act upon the body. 

I have thought on this very idea in the past that our brain is merely more like a CPU and it is OUR SPIRIT that is the actual item which controls the body and our free will.  Now, if the CPU (the brain) is damaged, it's going to make it hard for the body to access memory or other functions of the spirit.  However, what we are is not contained within this feeble mortal frame, but within the essence of something greater, that of a spirit that is both holy and divine. 

Mitchell on the otherhand takes the idea that where Sapolsky sees bacteria as having no free will, Mitchell sees that they do.  Obviously, as Sapolsky points out, there is no mechanism in bacteria or other simple organisms for a complex decision making device (such as our brain) and hence the question once again comes in...if they have free will...how is it accomplished.  Mitchell has it more on an instinct level of decision making, but also could be seen as a reference that there must be something beyond the biological to give us (and also bacteria and single celled organisms) free will, even if that free will is merely the struggle to survive.

In both ways, they are not actually arguing against the idea that we HAVE free will, but more in regards to how the biology works and whether that biology would be the thing that allows us free will, or makes it so that we are merely actors being acted upon.  In these cases they indicate that there MUST be something more that allows us free will than the mere biology of the make up of ourselves and the world around us. 

[CommanderSouth]

58 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

So, what is interesting is that Sapolsky isn't necessarily saying we don't have free will.  What he is saying is that our brain doesn't function in a way that permits us to have free will.  That, if looking at it biologically, we are merely responding to our environment.

Mitchell of course looks at it from the viewpoint that Sapolsky is a proponent of reforming the Criminal Justice System, and thus, arguing backwards from the idea that criminals are not responsible for their actions and thus their punishments are unjust and our way of looking at that should be reformed.

The interesting thing about both is that a conclusion can be drawn that there is something more that gives us our free will.  In Sapolsky's case, that there is something beyond our biology that is causing us to be able to make choices and decisions. 

I suppose we could look at it in the way that the brain is more of a CPU or a processor for something else.  It is interacting with something that enables it to act upon the body. 

I have thought on this very idea in the past that our brain is merely more like a CPU and it is OUR SPIRIT that is the actual item which controls the body and our free will.  Now, if the CPU (the brain) is damaged, it's going to make it hard for the body to access memory or other functions of the spirit.  However, what we are is not contained within this feeble mortal frame, but within the essence of something greater, that of a spirit that is both holy and divine. 

Mitchell on the otherhand takes the idea that where Sapolsky sees bacteria as having no free will, Mitchell sees that they do.  Obviously, as Sapolsky points out, there is no mechanism in bacteria or other simple organisms for a complex decision making device (such as our brain) and hence the question once again comes in...if they have free will...how is it accomplished.  Mitchell has it more on an instinct level of decision making, but also could be seen as a reference that there must be something beyond the biological to give us (and also bacteria and single celled organisms) free will, even if that free will is merely the struggle to survive.

In both ways, they are not actually arguing against the idea that we HAVE free will, but more in regards to how the biology works and whether that biology would be the thing that allows us free will, or makes it so that we are merely actors being acted upon.  In these cases they indicate that there MUST be something more that allows us free will than the mere biology of the make up of ourselves and the world around us. 

I had been discussing this with a family member and had the same conclusion.  That our body is hardware and our spirit or will is software.  Sure the stats of the hardware directly impacts our “fps” or performance in general. That bring the case  doesn’t mean the pc is running itself. 

[Carborendum]

13 hours ago, CommanderSouth said:

I got into reading the Libet experiments which basically say about 500 milliseconds before a person was making a choice to move their hand, their brain was already ramping up for it (readiness potential).  

I'm afraid it is both worse than and better than you believe.  The actual perception-reaction time is 350 milliseconds (0.35 sec).  Sounds bad.  So how could it be better than you thought?

Scientists have argued over whether such a short interval allows for free will or not.  This author obviously is on the side of "no free will."  But there are plenty of others who disagree.

There are two things to consider here which your author friend has not considered, or at least he disagrees with it.

• The power of "No".
• Quiet time.

POWER OF "NO"

When you are subjected to a stimulus, the brain takes a tiny moment to process it to where it/you are conscious of the stimulus.  Then the brain/body will react in 0.35 seconds.  But the ability of your conscious brain to stop that reaction is less than 0.1 sec.  This is the power of "No."  We basically say, "No, I will not do this."  Then you can pause and regroup.

We're quite aware of those commandments that tell us "thou shalt not..."  Why do yo think that is?  It's because if we hardwire some things into our brains, we can exercise the power of "No" when there are some things we simply shouldn't do.  This is called learning.  We pre-program some things into our brains so we know not to do them when there are particular stimuli.  We have just strengthened our power of "No".

QUIET TIME

So, what is important about quiet time?  This is the power of "Yes".  It is the programming time.  It is during times of peace, where we have little to no stimuli, that we can choose without stimuli the paths we are going to take.  For many, this leisure time is spent on entertainment or debauchery.  So, you can guess what kind of programming is happening.

What if you spent that time studying the scriptures and the words of the prophets?  What if you spent that time pondering celestial ideas?  What if you spent that time thinking, "If I find myself in this situation, I'm going to..."  If you don't make good use of your programming time, you are choosing to get bad programming by default.

You think you don't have free will because of a 0.35 sec gap?  You may be right.  It is pre-determined by how you have been programming your brain all your life.  But every person on this planet has programming time.  It is how you choose to use it that pre-determines what you will do when you're actively engaged with stimuli.

So, the question is not how you will react when placed in a situation.  The question is: What are you doing during your programming time?

Jesus spent his time as a youth pondering the lilies of the field and the fowls of the air.  He spent time pondering the meaning and fulfillment of the Law of Moses.  He pondered the things of Eternity.  He spent his programming time serving others.

Enos was an average guy who was simply hunting.  But in that quiet time, he pondered the prophecies about Jesus Christ.  He pondered his sins and repentance during his programming time.

Joseph Smith spent a lot of his programming time pondering all the different faiths wondering which one was true.

How do you spend your programming time?

Edited November 14, 2023 by Carborendum

[CommanderSouth]

Interestingly in my digging I've found "debunking" of Libet's experiment, (here and here).  One questions the interpretation, and the other the experiment itself.  It's so odd.  I understand that all this equates to a very convincing wink, nod and, "are you SURE?" and it's enough to throw me into a tizzy.  Which of course makes me think about Adam and Eve.  "You shall surely NOT die." or in this case "You surely DON'T have free will."  And that's enough to cause trouble.

[CommanderSouth]

Very similar to when I read Blade Runner and briefly pondered if I could know I were an Android.  That's the trick, the question of "are you SURE" followed by, "well how can you KNOW".  I know I do that myself all the time on lots of things.

[NeuroTypical]

@CommanderSouth, you remind me an awful lot of 25-years-ago me, with all the quest to know, and unassailable doubts, and taking queues about humanity from works of fiction and all.  I came within a few credit hours of getting a minor in philosophy trying to figure out what I believed.   Here's how I resolved things:

Quote

"My most pressing issue is whether or not Joseph Smith was a fraud or was what he claimed to be and how do you determine that?" 

I saw this sentence written by a lady who was questioning here testimony, and decided to write the story of how I came to my testimony in response.  Her issue was exactly what was running through my head as a 25 yr old guy.  I had realized something 6 or 7 years before that.  My entire experience of going to church, advancing up from class to class, becoming a deacon, then teacher, then priest, then elder, all of that had happened without hardly any faith or belief or even knowledge on my part.  I was a kid, going through the program the church had set up for kids to go through.  I did not know the church was true, and I stopped standing up in front of people to say so the minute they stopped making me.  About the only thing I did know, it's that I didn't know what was true, what was important, or how to find out.

So, I spent 6 or 7 years basically enjoying myself on Sundays.  I had LDS friends and inactive/non-LDS friends.  Both were off engaged in setting the foundations for the rest of their lives.  Both seemed (relative to me) fairly confident that they had halfway decent notions of what they wanted out of life, and were shooting for it.

I found myself at a crossroads.  If God existed, if all of this stuff they taught me in church was true, then I needed to be on one path.  If the church was not true, then I had no reason to be on that path.  Mozart composed his symphonies in his mind, then basically dictated them out onto paper as a finished product.  Surely it fell within the realm of possibility that this ability might be present in others, even if very very rare.  It was conceivable that Joseph did what Mozart did - put it all together in his head, and say it out loud.  Perhaps he even believed what he was doing.  Placebo effects could explain the results of blessings I'd witnessed.  Tradition and a desire to belong, to be a part of something greater than yourself, could explain the church and why it was working.  I hadn't really sought out criticisms of the LDS claims in my early 20's - I didn't need to.  I came up with enough of them myself.

On the other hand, I didn't really have any firm basis from which to deny the existence of God.  Joseph could have been telling the truth.  He, the BoM, the church, it fell in the realm of possibility that they all were exactly what they claimed to be.  Is a miraculous healing any less miraculous, just because we know a thing or two about how endorphines work, and how the body can be "tricked" into healing itself?

Well again, it was a crossroads.  Both had good points and bad.  I wanted what my LDS friends had - their temple marriages, their firm beliefs in God and His plan for them.  The difference was, one path was true, one was false.  I decided it didn't matter to me which one I wanted more, the important issue was, which one was the true path, and which was false.  I would not lie to myself or others, in order to follow a false path, just because I wanted it more.

So, I started with the "Old Joe is a fraud" path first.  I came within a few credit hours of a minor in philosophy.  I came to realize that, as far as human knowledge went, we were still struggling with what the proper questions were.  As far as laying the groundwork for discovering truth, humanity never really got much further than "I think, therefore I am."  Well, actually humanity did get further than that, but by adding on assumptions that weren't really warranted.  That was one key to my understanding - there is almost no such thing as truth without assumptions.  People without testimonies assume there are no real testimonies to be had.  People with testimonies assume that they are not just brains inside jars, having fake sensory inputs fed to them, having endorphin-based emotional experiences imposed on them by a grand deciever.

Well, the "God doesn't exist" path didn't really offer up much in the form of truth claims to be tested, so I moved to the other path.  It was time to figure out for myself if the church was true or not.  It had specific truth claims.  These could be evaluated, and found groundless or grounded.

Alma 32:27 But behold, if ye will awake and arouse your faculties, even to an experiment upon my words, and exercise a particle of faith, yea, even if ye can no more than desire to believe, let this desire work in you, even until ye believe in a manner that ye can give place for a portion of my words. 

Moroni 10:4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.  

Ok - so there you go.  The scriptures identified me, and gave me a path to follow, through which I could undeniably verify the truth.  I had only to make one assumption - that my senses would not lie to me under controlled conditions.  A tough assumption for a minor in philosophy to make.  What if life is a dream?  Ok - set it aside.  If my life is a dream, then so be it.  I'll work with what I've got.  I'll work towards truth.  I know there is a bunch of stuff that I don't know, and I have been given a series of hoops to jump through, and promised a rather important promise, should I jump through them correctly.

So I had Alma 32:27, and Moroni 10:4.  The first promised a slowly evolving process from faith to knowledge, through the assumption that if it looks good, and acts good, and produces good fruit, then it is good.  Not really enough to base a testimony on, in my opinion.  But Moroni promised something else - "he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.".  That sounded a little more like it.  So, when I looked at the verse, it laid out my side of the bargain:
 
1- "And when ye shall receive these things" - Before it would work, I had to read the Book of Mormon.  But more than read it, to "receive" it.  I had to internalize it - deeply reading for meaning, more than just a cursory glance.  Not a critical reading, looking for faults.  I had to read it, with the notion that it very well might be exactly what it claimes to be - scripture.  True.  The word of God.  A literal history of people who literally lived.
 
2- "I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true" 
So, I had to pray.  Not just pray, but pray in the name of Christ.  That means, I had to be worthy of his name.  The guy who owns The Simsons brand, will let any amount of stupid garbage bear the name - Bart Simpson toothpaste, cheap flimsy Homer travel mugs, stupid T-shirts make out of inferior materials, whatever.  But Jesus is more choosy.  If you are going to bear his name, you need to be following his teachings.  
 
This is possible to do, without actually believing in him.  After all, I follow some of Sun-Tzu's "art of war" notions, but I don't believe he is a god, and I also don't share his faith.   The best advice for a happy marriage, the notion that I've used as a foundation for mine, came from a drunk Tongan I met in an alleyway one night.  I follow that advice daily, yet I'm not a big fan of the guy who gave it to me.
 
So, to take upon myself the name of Christ, I had to do and be a couple of main things:
* Not sinning
* Loving my neighbor
* Desiring to know a God I could love
 
I did not have to be perfect, I figured it was a matter of heart.  It wasn't how close to my destination I was, it mattered only that my compass was pointed in the right direction, and I was following it.  Yes, there was some doubt about what the compass was pointing to - was it true north, or just wishful thinking.  But that didn't matter - I was just trying to satisfy this part of the scripture - and be able to pray in the name of Christ.
 
So, I prayed.  I prayed nightly, starting about halfway through the book.  I prayed fervently.  My prayers were short and simple: "Dear Heavenly Father, if thou exist, thou knowest my heart.  Thou knowest I am sincere.  I desire to know of the truthfulness of this work.  Please show it to me.  In the name of thy son, Jesus Christ, amen".  Simple, plain, sincere, honest, and pretty much daily.  
 
3- "and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ,"
Ok - 3 requirements - and I had to have all 3 of them.  In years past, I had read the BoM and prayed in the name of Christ, and got nothing.  I was missing real intent - I figured I wouldn't get an answer, and praying was a way of proving my guess true.

It's about where my heart is.  It needs to be sincere, not with an ulterior motive, burdened by sin, or trying to get something else out of the experience.  My intent had to be true.  No faith, no promise.
 
I can't impress enough on everyone, the importance of these 3 items.  They're related, but if you are missing one, don't be expecting anything.  If you are having a hard time figuring out where you are on these 3, you're probably not there.  
 
Throughout the process, I was comfortable with my part of the bargain.  It was like showing up for a test being very, very well prepared - there's a confidence based on the fact that you know what you're doing.  I wasn't lying to myself, or bending any rules, or figuring out the least I could do to satisfy the bare minimum - I was there, and there solidly.
 
I did not believe in God - but I didn't have to.  I just had to want to.  I was not setting aside doubts - they held the center stage.  
 
4- "He will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost."
 
So, what can I say - it happened.  
 
It happened at work, where I was a candy maker, with an arm covered with chocolate.  (If you've ever been to a fancy hotel, or taken a fancy cruise, and there's a chocolate mint on your pillow - that's what I used to make by hand.)
 
The details?  Here is where I need to be a bit vague, in order to avoid embarassing stuff about someone who is not me.  I was working away quietly, thinking about reality, wondering if I'd ever know what it was, and thinking about an unresolved situation in my life.  I was at a crossroads, only tangentially related to my quest to discover the truth about the Book of Mormon.  As I thought about this crossroads, trying to discern what to make out of the facts before me, I thought something along the lines of "Well, this pattern indicates that things are moving in the right direction..."
 
And it happened.
 
Words can't really explain it - they can only approximate it.  
 
It was unmistakable, not a warm fuzzy, not an emotional reaction.
 
I had my answer.  It was "yes".  
 
It was a strong, internal sensation.  Not a feeling - I wasn't happy or sad.  The best word is "confirmation".  And what was it confirming?  Many things.   It was confirming that yes, I had just said something true - the pattern I was looking at was indeed moving in the right direction.  It confirmed that there WAS a right direction.  It confirmed that this notion of reality that I had looked at - this bizarre tale of prophets and plates and revelations and restorations, had the added benefit of being true.
 
A few side details:
* The first thing that dawned on me was, "My gosh, this is the Holy Ghost communicating to me!"  The second thought that came a few minutes later was "My gosh, I've felt this before!"  In one or two of the most stressful times of my life, I had felt that sensation before.  I had written off the experience at the time, but realization flooded me - the Lord had stood by me, even while I was inactive.
 
* Other people tell me their conversion stories, and they are often different.  My Bishop, as a young man, was watching a sunset, and said a brief prayer "thank you, God", and heard the words as clear as day "You'll be all right - I'll always take care of you".  My experience was different.  Another guy from my ward had been desiring to feel the Love of Christ - and felt it unexpectedly when he stood up to shake hands with a brother from another ward.  They stood there with clasped hands, with tears flowing down both their faces.  My experience was different - there was not a lot of emotion (although I pretty soon felt exhilleration, as it sank in what was happening).  My wife's grandfather was on a bar stool 40 years ago, having left the church, and was almost knocked to the floor by the words "Wayne, why hast thou forsaken me?"   I heard no words.  The energy and the impact was internal to me, not external like it was to him.
 
* I have since felt this impression, this confirmation, quite often.  As I returned to church in full force, keeping my baptismal covenant, the Holy Ghost has been, at points in my life, my constant companion.

One last interesting part of the story: 

Our scriptures state that faith preceeds the miracle, and that knowledge comes after the act. After I had recieved this answer, I was able to test this "answer", this influence of the spirit, this burning in the bosom, fairly scientifically. 

I had an issue that I needed guidance on, and took it to the Lord. What I needed to do in the situation was fairly evident, but I desired that confirmation. To my surprise, the confirmation was to NOT do what I figured was correct. The expirement took about 30 seconds, and went like this: 

"Lord, should I do this?" (speaking the words internally) 
(nothing for 5 seconds) 

"Lord, should I not do this?" 
(confirmation - burning in the bosom for 5 seconds) 

"Should I do this?" 
(confirmation off - like someone had thrown a switch) 

"Should I not do this?" 
(confirmation on - again like an internal switch was thrown) 

I did this a few more times. Throughout the rest of the day and week, I was able to "feel the spirit" every time I thought about what had happened. 

So, I acted on what the confirmation directed - and I did NOT do what I thought was the correct thing. Within two days, an event occured that set things to right, that would not have occurred if I had acted as I thought I should. My initial estimation of what to do, turned out to be less desirable than what actually happened. 

I've never heard of anyone who claimed to be able to turn an emotional reaction on and off several times in a minute. I'm familiar with how our brains and psyche's work, and I'm aware of various ways we humans convince ourselves of what we want to be convinced of, true or false. I'm aware of the phenomenons of self- and group-hypnosis. I understand 'groupthink', "brainwashing", and manipulation of reality by people in authority. This wasn't like any of those. 

So the point of this last part is, this very convincing scientific test (it was to me, anyway), did not occur until AFTER I had exercised my faith, and spent a year on my knees asking to know if God existed or not. I figure if you demand something similar up front, you'll probably go away empty handed. 

Now, a quarter of a century later, I'm still going strong.  (I still take queues about humanity from scifi though.  A good author can have a lot to say about the nature of humanity and the soul and all that.)

Good luck to you!

 

Edited November 14, 2023 by NeuroTypical

[CommanderSouth]

19 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

@CommanderSouth, you remind me an awful lot of 25-years-ago me, with all the quest to know, and unassailable doubts, and taking queues about humanity from works of fiction and all.  I came within a few credit hours of getting a minor in philosophy trying to figure out what I believed.   Here's how I resolved things:

Now, a quarter of a century later, I'm still going strong.  (I still take queues about humanity from scifi though.  A good author can have a lot to say about the nature of humanity and the soul and all that.)

Good luck to you!

 

Well, I think Card annunciated my feelings about Intelligences, Creation, and Embodiment better than anyone.  I am also chewing on the thought that, I truly "want" free will, I "want" to exist.  If I have the illusion of free will, isn't that actually better that physically having it?  Because, while I can be worried about the illusion, I don't know if it's possible (nor do I wish to try) to break it.  So if I have free will from some endowment, I have it.  If I don't but think I do, I still "effectively" have it, and am deluded in such a way that I can't lose it.  It's like internal vs external motivation.  Better to be internally motivated, so why not better to be internally "free willed".

It would be like desiring to be cold.  If I was physically in the cold, I'm cold.  If my mind sends the sensations to receptors without the stimuli, I'm still cold, so I'm still happy! (Barring other things like being somewhere dangerous and normal stimuli being blocked, but that isn't important)

Edited November 14, 2023 by CommanderSouth

[CommanderSouth]

Life is almost like Pascal's wager in that sense.  Act like you DO have free will, in case you did.  Because if you don't, it doesn't matter any way.  And this is a choice with only 2 options, so, unlike Pascal's wager, it's a valid line of reason.  You don't have free will, nothing matters.  You do, you should do something with it.  There is no third option.

[Traveler]

Greetings @CommanderSouth:

I would present something quite different in the discussion of freewill or determinism.   Before I get into the rudiments of thought I would present my background.  I am a retired scientist and engineer that worked in the field of industrial automation, robotics and artificial intelligence.  Prior to retirement I worked as a consultant.  When a complex automated system is to be put into place there are several stages in the process.  We begin with a requirement phase, followed by a design phase, then a development phase, then a testing phase and finely the implementation phase.  There are also two things to keep in mind.  First: that each phase has several sub level phases and second that there is not a fine line between phases but rather a gradual shift.  It is not unlikely that newly discovered requirements, of necessity, are added after the initial requirement phase – sometimes additional requirements are added during the implementation phase.  Most likely the entire process will be repeated, and versions of development be added (released) over time.  In short, seldom is there a definite beginning or end.

I have often wondered about freewill verses determinism.   I have concluded that in order for freewill to exist there must be more than just a choice.  For example, a blind choice of what is behind doors A, B and C – is not, in my opinion, an exercise in freewill (or Agency).  There must be knowledge – not just a knowledge of choice (or choices) but a knowledge of outcome of choice.  Otherwise, the choice is blind and in essence an ignorant choice of what is behind a door.  I have also concluded that if we are to look at any subset of development – what is taking place will not appear to be freewill but rather an acting out of determination.

At this point I would present the concept that we are complex beings in a process of becoming a completed divinely intelligent being.  That the initial course of the process began in a pre-existence.  That our mortal experience is just a phase of our becoming and that there will be another phase after we die.  If one only measures what occurs between birth and death – the only ration conclusion is that freewill and agency does not exist and that our individual fate is well determined.   If there is to be any possibility of freewill (agency) then there must, of necessity, be something of significance before birth as well as after death.

We are told in scripture that our mortal probation is in essence a testing phase.  In my work, testing was not intended to pass or fail – determine heaven or hell.  But rather an experiment under extreme conditions to determine capabilities and also to determine what changes are needed to be made to meet the requirements.  I want to stress the idea that testing is not to determine failure but rather what improvements are needed or required.

I would submit that our mortal life is specifically designed to test our individual capabilities, especially under certain extreme circumstances.  I would also submit that the extent of our testing was well thought out and designed to our particular freewill and agency in cooperation between ourselves and our Father in Heaven.  Thus comparing ourselves to others in this life is a fruitless exercise.  Our purpose is to complete our testing scripts – not anyone else’s.  In so doing we fulfill our freewill and agency – even though in this life only, it all looks like determinism.  According to the Gospel of Christ, our only concern is to get through our testing phase loving G-d and our fellow men.  That is all that we need to achieve during this life in order to be ready for our next phase of development.

 

The Traveler

[CommanderSouth]

9 minutes ago, Traveler said:

Greetings @CommanderSouth:

I would present something quite different in the discussion of freewill or determinism.   Before I get into the rudiments of thought I would present my background.  I am a retired scientist and engineer that worked in the field of industrial automation, robotics and artificial intelligence.  Prior to retirement I worked as a consultant.  When a complex automated system is to be put into place there are several stages in the process.  We begin with a requirement phase, followed by a design phase, then a development phase, then a testing phase and finely the implementation phase.  There are also two things to keep in mind.  First: that each phase has several sub level phases and second that there is not a fine line between phases but rather a gradual shift.  It is not unlikely that newly discovered requirements, of necessity, are added after the initial requirement phase – sometimes additional requirements are added during the implementation phase.  Most likely the entire process will be repeated, and versions of development be added (released) over time.  In short, seldom is there a definite beginning or end.

I have often wondered about freewill verses determinism.   I have concluded that in order for freewill to exist there must be more than just a choice.  For example, a blind choice of what is behind doors A, B and C – is not, in my opinion, an exercise in freewill (or Agency).  There must be knowledge – not just a knowledge of choice (or choices) but a knowledge of outcome of choice.  Otherwise, the choice is blind and in essence an ignorant choice of what is behind a door.  I have also concluded that if we are to look at any subset of development – what is taking place will not appear to be freewill but rather an acting out of determination.

At this point I would present the concept that we are complex beings in a process of becoming a completed divinely intelligent being.  That the initial course of the process began in a pre-existence.  That our mortal experience is just a phase of our becoming and that there will be another phase after we die.  If one only measures what occurs between birth and death – the only ration conclusion is that freewill and agency does not exist and that our individual fate is well determined.   If there is to be any possibility of freewill (agency) then there must, of necessity, be something of significance before birth as well as after death.

We are told in scripture that our mortal probation is in essence a testing phase.  In my work, testing was not intended to pass or fail – determine heaven or hell.  But rather an experiment under extreme conditions to determine capabilities and also to determine what changes are needed to be made to meet the requirements.  I want to stress the idea that testing is not to determine failure but rather what improvements are needed or required.

I would submit that our mortal life is specifically designed to test our individual capabilities, especially under certain extreme circumstances.  I would also submit that the extent of our testing was well thought out and designed to our particular freewill and agency in cooperation between ourselves and our Father in Heaven.  Thus comparing ourselves to others in this life is a fruitless exercise.  Our purpose is to complete our testing scripts – not anyone else’s.  In so doing we fulfill our freewill and agency – even though in this life only, it all looks like determinism.  According to the Gospel of Christ, our only concern is to get through our testing phase loving G-d and our fellow men.  That is all that we need to achieve during this life in order to be ready for our next phase of development.

 

The Traveler

Having worked in QA that is a representation of life I should have made sooner. Testing is just for working out what bugs need to be addressed. You know going in that you’ll have some. 
 

I have to say that is a profound comparison. And a much more reasonable understanding of pre existence, this life, and eternity. It paints the entire thing differently. 

The more I think the more I realize, answering this question is one that you have to do if you want to believe in God. In the sense that if you are ever actually concerned. If this is all there is then this is all there is. We are just lumps of firing neurons.  If there is more, then there is more.  To believe you have choice at all, to believe you exist, you have to believe that something beyond material exists.  We can HAVE agency, and agency demands there be something more to have it in the first place. We have to be more than our bodies alone. And that puts you smack in the middle of embodied spirits and intelligences. Interesting how all roads lead to the Gospel it seems. 

[Ironhold]

18 hours ago, CommanderSouth said:

So, I like tech news, among my sites is ArsTechnica.  Yesterday I stumbled on to this gem (link Determinism Vs Free Will)

Got to reading it, but now my anxiety is ramping up.  Which is bad because I have GAD and Depression.  I'm on meds, but I don't like how I'm feeling.  I now can't shake the feeling of the determinist view being right.  But if that were true (which I am mentally resisting), there is no ME to begin with.  I'm just the flame alight from the candle of my body.  Thankfully in one breath, I understand that I am a spirit in a body.  Eventually they'll be united perfectly, and fill the measure of their calling, or however the saying goes.  While I GET that, I don't feel it.  I got into reading the Libet experiments which basically say about 500 milliseconds before a person was making a choice to move their hand, their brain was already ramping up for it (readiness potential).  Though on the other hand I also read that if you read that data through a different filter, you get it lining up with when participants were saying they were making the decision.

All of this is to say, I really just want to talk about ways we are meant to act, and not be acted upon.  Because it's interesting to me, after having some good breakthroughs in the last month with my testimony, I feel like I'm being hit in the innermost part of my being, that is to say, MY BEING ITSELF.  I wonder if this is the misery that Satan wants for us, he is disembodied, perhaps his anguish is not having a full sense of self.  And being denied this, wants to take it from us, if he can.  In any event, I have been thinking about the verse about being able to act, and not be acted upon.  I've been thinking about the whole crux of the plan being the ability to chose.  And that is where my fear is, that I have no ability to choose.  That I AM just reacting to stimuli, even if it is a trillion small ones.  And in that way, I am not.  So I don't expect therapy (though I hope this process is therapeutic).  But what are some thought processes you guys have when dealing with this?  

If I ponder it more, I do realize we are uniquely equipped to deal with this problem.  Our self, the intelligence that is "us" is co eternal with God, which makes sense.  It is also co eternal with truth, whatever it is.  These things being the case, our spirit has agency, it is the most fundamental gift we have, and what Satan wanted to take.  It is also in a sense, the only thing we can give God that he doesn't have.  We can hand over US to him.  

This makes sense, but I'm having a hard time "feeling so now" it's like the flavor of the jalapeño of secularism is drowning the perfect mildness of the gospel.  Ironic I can fire off all these nice gospel phrases and talk references :D. 

As I've explained before, I've had a type of training in psychological warfare. 

There are people like me who are trained to get inside a person's head, see what makes them tick, and wrench that around to the point that the person in question does what we want them to do while still thinking it's their own idea. 

Why would we need to know how to do this? 

The capacity for free will for people who understand what's going on around them and are capable of reaching out for what they want is such a powerful force that it has to be manually subverted through manipulation and coercion if someone's going to shut it down. 

 

[CommanderSouth]

1 minute ago, Ironhold said:

As I've explained before, I've had a type of training in psychological warfare. 

There are people like me who are trained to get inside a person's head, see what makes them tick, and wrench that around to the point that the person in question does what we want them to do while still thinking it's their own idea. 

Why would we need to know how to do this? 

The capacity for free will for people who understand what's going on around them and are capable of reaching out for what they want is such a powerful force that it has to be manually subverted through manipulation and coercion if someone's going to shut it down. 

 

I guess the trick is to just have you help me believe in Free Will (I jest)

[CommanderSouth]

It’s funny because the whole thing is similar to trying to figure out if you are in the matrix. You can’t while being plugged in, and if you are, you have to be plugged in. 

It almost feels like a semantic with no practical purpose. Though the implications are very important. 

Edited November 14, 2023 by CommanderSouth
Dupe

[rcthompson88]

Your article seems to use some sensationalism to oversell the idea of persuasions impact on how we make certain choices more than proving our lack of free will.

I also say this as a professionally trained social scientist, the social sciences in general have an alarmingly low replicability rate when it comes to research, and, as with many of the sciences, much of what we think we know today will change tomorrow.

[CommanderSouth]

It's VERY interesting, I was just watching a video by German theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder who I earlier saw post a video saying how free will doesn't exist, and how if you don't believe that you're just rejecting science, and so on (I felt it was very arrogant, but I digress, also futile, because if it doesn't, I couldn't believe anyway).  I was watching a follow up video where she was elaborating and said that there was a proven mathematical theory/formula/whatever that said for humans to have free will... particles would have to have free will.  I stopped the video there, and wanted to tell her, "Have I got a church for you!"

Does any of that mean anything?  Of course not, but I would be lying if I rejected the idea thar right now, everything I'm finding, even in this darkness, heck, even the darkness ITSELF, is pointing back to the restored Gospel. By saying there is no such thing as immaterial matter, Joseph hit a home run he didn't even know he was swinging at.  By saying that everything is made of intelligence, he put forth a worldview that is very MUCH for OUR day.  It almost makes Skousen irrefutable with his "intelligence" idea of the atonement (if we assume the mathematical theorem of necessary particle intelligence is true).  It makes Card's understanding of a sort of graded "aiua" (From Speaker for the Dead) a perfect explanation of EVERYTHING, they have will, but they follow deterministic patterns, but have freer wills the higher up you go.

Edited November 14, 2023 by CommanderSouth

[mikbone]

54 minutes ago, CommanderSouth said:

It almost makes Skousen irrefutable with his "intelligence" idea of the atonement

If you go into the background of Skousen’s idea.  He gives credit to John Widtsoe for the origin of the idea.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_A._Widtsoe

[CommanderSouth]

2 minutes ago, mikbone said:

If you go into the background of Skousen’s idea.  He gives credit to John Widtsoe for the origin of the idea.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_A._Widtsoe

That’s true.  I forgot that. He even mentions it in the talk.