Q&A: A Small Idea Regarding Free Choice
A Small Idea Regarding Free Choice
Question
Okay, so the world of free choice is an interesting one. And I have a question: about a year ago, I remember myself in Genesis class, studying Genesis 4, the story of Cain and Abel. The rabbi gave an interpretation according to which the firstborn brother is automatically jealous of his brother, because he takes away his status as the “son” and turns him into a “brother,” and we studied the verses. Then we got to verse 5: “And Cain was very angry, and his face fell.” The rabbi asked us: what happened to Cain? And he immediately answered that this was a double consequence. On the one hand, anger; on the other hand, an expression of shame: “and his face fell.” On the one hand, the anger is understandable: you have been rejected before God. But why did Cain fall into depression? And the rabbi immediately answered: because Cain thought he had no ability to change. That his fate had been sealed. And then he continued reading the verses: “And the Lord said to Cain: Why are you angry, and why has your face fallen? Surely, if you improve yourself, you will be lifted up; and if you do not improve yourself, sin crouches at the door. Its desire is toward you, but you can rule over it.” God revealed to Cain that he has free choice! That he can rule over sin! I remember sitting in class not understanding why we were wasting half an hour on this explanation. What is all this nonsense.
Until some time ago I saw the video –
www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0YwNEKtRCc&ab_channel=ShalemCollege-TheShalemAcademicCenter
and I said to myself: wow, there really is something difficult here. Do you think there is any weight to the fact that a person, throughout his life, actually feels that he has free choice? Does that indicate anything?
Answer
I haven’t seen the video. But the question isn’t clear to me. Of course the feeling carries weight, even if sometimes it is misleading.
Discussion on Answer
No, no, that’s exactly the point. It’s materialism versus dualism. I’m a believing person, and indeed all my life it never occurred to me that I’m some kind of robot… and God forbid, because atheists actually believe that Hitler too was a robot! That Eichmann, who told his Nazi soldiers that he was stopping the shipment of supplies to the border where they were losing, because their supreme goal was to kill all the Jews, and the role of the trains was shifting from transporting weapons and soldiers to transporting the Jews of Hungary to Auschwitz (400,000 of them) — he too was a robot! A “sick” person with no choice; that’s just what befell him, so what can you do? That’s the madness as I see it.
So what is the question? A person can be ill and have no choice. And what does all this have to do with your opening post? It seems to me that you yourself haven’t clarified the question to yourself.
The question is whether the very fact that it seems ridiculous to a person that he is a robot — and I’m fairly sure every person on the street would think that’s ridiculous — constitutes evidence, in your opinion.
I wrote that yes.
I couldn’t resist and took a look. I haven’t heard such nonsense in a long time, though it is typical of James and pragmatism (which I think I devoted a column to). Really philosophy for the marketplace. What in this silly video stirred any difficulty or thoughts in you? I’m baffled!