Accepting determinism does not require rejecting free will. At this point, I don't think that the concept of free will is particularly useful whether affirmed or denied. Notions of morality that depend on actions being made by free will to justify punishment or reward seem outdated and simplistic to me, while on the other side, using determinism to justify some sort of nihilistic worldview is also silly.

The way I think about free will is probably best described in the book A New Kind of Science, in the section called The Phenomenon of Free Will (readable online). The easiest way to come to understand this perspective I think would be to read the book Creation: Life and How to Make It. I'd highly recommend it.

I also find some Buddhist concepts to be quite enlightening (pun intended), particularly the ideas of no-self and of interdependent co-arising. Wikipedia really isn't the best way to get acquainted with these ideas, but I've linked you to it anyway. Let me know if you have any questions about it.

Quote from axcho

Accepting determinism does not require rejecting free will. At this point, I don't think that the concept of free will is particularly useful whether affirmed or denied. Notions of morality that depend on actions being made by free will to justify punishment or reward seem outdated and simplistic to me, while on the other side, using determinism to justify some sort of nihilistic worldview is also silly.

The way I think about free will is probably best described in the book A New Kind of Science, in the section called The Phenomenon of Free Will (readable online). The easiest way to come to understand this perspective I think would be to read the book Creation: Life and How to Make It. I'd highly recommend it.

I also find some Buddhist concepts to be quite enlightening (pun intended), particularly the ideas of no-self and of interdependent co-arising. Wikipedia really isn't the best way to get acquainted with these ideas, but I've linked you to it anyway. Let me know if you have any questions about it.

I'd love to read those, but first, I want to know this: do they have religious backing? Because I hate it when I am reading a book that starts out great and claims to be a science book, but then suddenly reveals that it's entire point requires the belief in the Christian god.

(My example from experience is a book titled Gone From Earth, which atempts to explain the extinction of species. The book starts out seeming scientific, taking the reader through a long-winded but fairly entertaining and witty string of logical deductions, only to end with the entire argument requiring the existence of God to be correct. I did finish the book, but the rest was very preachy and I wasn't convinced.)

Quote from Ash

I'd love to read those, but first, I want to know this: do they have religious backing? Because I hate it when I am reading a book that starts out great and claims to be a science book, but then suddenly reveals that it's entire point requires the belief in the Christian god.

(My example from experience is a book titled Gone From Earth, which atempts to explain the extinction of species. The book starts out seeming scientific, taking the reader through a long-winded but fairly entertaining and witty string of logical deductions, only to end with the entire argument requiring the existence of God to be correct. I did finish the book, but the rest was very preachy and I wasn't convinced.)

I hate it when books do that, I usually burn them and try to commit suicide, for spending a good 30 bucks on it.

Quote from springtime4hitler

Or you could just grow a pair, read them, and not piss about how you hate religion.

Looks like someone hasn't been paying attention.

Quote from springtime4hitler

Or you could just grow a pair, read them, and not piss about how you hate religion.

Or you could just, you know, not read them.

Both A New Kind of Science by Stephen Wolfram and Creation by Steve Grand are distinctly scientific, non-religious books.

A New Kind of Science is extremely long and dense (~1000 pages), and covers a wide range of topics - I'm just pointing to about four pages of that in a section called The Phenomenon of Free Will, which you can read online for free. I think it would be pretty hard to understand without the context of the rest of the book, but as a shorter, entertaining and easy-to-read substitute, I'd highly recommend reading Creation: Life and How to Make It instead. Several chapters of that are online at the previous link if you'd like to try out a sample.

If I'd push any "religion", it would have to be something more along the lines of Buddhism or various Native American traditions rather than Christianity (though whether Buddhism should be considered a religion at all is somewhat arguable). But my approach to religion is not about pushing "belief", it's about coming to understand their concepts and worldview and using it to get a broader and deeper understanding of one's place in the world.

Oh, and if you want a book written by a Christian, but is in fact awesome and not Christian-influenced at all, take a look at Out of Control by Kevin Kelly. The full text of the book is available online, about ecology and artificial life and all sorts of fun stuff, and I'd highly recommend it. I didn't even realize that he was Christian until I read it on his website. (not that being Christian is bad, necessarily, but those who are looking for an insightful scientific perspective will be glad to know that his work is untainted by religious dogma)

Here's the reading list I'm suggesting: Creation by Steve Grand (240 pages), and if you like that, Out of Control by Kevin Kelly (520 pages). Read them! They are among my favorite books. If you like those (or even if you don't) and you want more recommendations, send me a PM. :)

Quote from springtime4hitler

Or you could just grow a pair, read them, and not piss about how you hate religion.

I used to be a Christian, then I went through, looking at what could actually be factual, found very little, found a lot of contradictions, decided Peter was a faggot, and lol'd at the vicar of the church for a while.

Then I become a atheist, and I still am. Seriously, if I wanted to read something about how GOD makes everything, and so will end everything, and he influences everything inbetween, I'd go read the ****ing bible, but I won't; because god is a major faggot who kills like 2 million people without a ****ing chance, and then goes on about how Satan is the pure core of evil, when at most he's killed maybe 7 people.

Being half atheist (more science then religeon....) How can we honestly know about how everything started?...

Anyway, Free will.... i'm only 13 so free will to me is 2 months of summer...

How can you be half ****ing atheist?

OH YAH I BELIEVEZ IN GOD BUT HE DUSN'T MAKE UNIVARSE EVULUTION MADE US BUT GUD IS AWESUM BECUZ OF JEWSAS.

Quote from xekia

Being half atheist (more science then religeon....)

Atheism isn't like a religion that worships science. It's really annoying when people say that.

Atheism is a viewpoint that is basically one that rejects religion and goes with facts and evidence, which is coincidentally science when it comes to evolution and things.

i think me means agnostic. no wait... um... speak sense boy!

[edit]
damn posted at the same time

I personally believe in the Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy way of life.

I make sure to slaughter every white mouse I see.

THOSE DAMN RULING BASTARDS.

Nigger mice are trouble too.

Those damn niggermice stole mah' cheese.