JuliusCaesar wrote:u]if god is omnipotent, then free will is non-existent in any form[/u]
We can quantitatively determine freewill be this simple equation:
Freewill = instinct + intelligence.
Instinct being the simple needs to exist in life, such as drinking, eating, excreting waste; while intelligence is relative to brain activity, much as Kelvin is relative to kinetic movement.
Take these two examples:
In dogs, it is a very small chance that the dog will choose to starve itself as it cannot allow itself to think of how/why it would do such a thing. (Note: this is seen among a large array of creatures)
In humans, it is likely that sometimes they can choose to starve themselves.
Both species go about instinct, as certain; dogs know that they must eat to survive as do humans, both commence in disposal of waste and both focus to the main purpose of natural selection: reproduction. So let us allow this variable to be a constant. Let us set it to one.
So now we have:
Freewill = 1 + intelligence
Let us make make this the probability of the two examples:
Freewill(h) = 1 + intelligence(h)Freewill(d) = 1 + intelligence(d)
We can eliminate the constants, leaving:
Freewill(h) = intelligence(h)Freewill(d) = intelligence(d)
The primary difference of the two is intelligence and how they can choose to reason. This makes sense as humans have evolved for cerebric activities whereas dogs are still focusing on physical traits to better their survival.
Now, we have to set thresholds (probably from arbitrary sampling) to see at which levels can intelligence actually determine when a creature can commence in an activity but if we are to invent a system of actual intellectual measurement we can see that humans have more base intelligence than dogs.
With that knowledge at hand, let us focus back on the equation:
Freewill(h) = intelligence(h)Freewill(d) = intelligence(d)
intelligence(h) > intelligence(d)
and thus:
Freewill(h) > Freewill(d)
So:
Freewill(h)Freewill(d)
Humans have a higher probability of doing the task at hand.
This makes sense.