Freewill is a prerequisite in understanding the relationship between God and Man.It therefore becomes necessary to attack the base of freewill on two fronts.
The first of these is to make a claim that it is our genetic makeup which will make us act in predetermined ways and the second is to consider the effects of our environment on how we will inevitably respond in given sets of circumstances.
The picture here suggests that Man is less than the sum of his constituent parts - a logic so riddled with holes, it is not worthy of our consideration.
The best lies are always those which are mixed in with a fair smattering of truth.
Man is affected by his genes - he has to be. Man is also affected by his environment - how could he not be?
The fallacy here lies in the manner in which these elements have been blown up out of all proportion. They are presented as 'the answer'.
The best way to counter such arguments on the personal level is to analyse your own decision-making.
We make literally thousands of decisions daily. Some of these stem from routines, others from common practice, yet more from following a logical path through a series of situations.
Immediately it becomes apparent that the 'the big two' arguments do not explain a great deal.
When we move onto decisions which are worked out in our brains and not completed automatically - both clearly have influence but nothing more than that.
Give it a try. See which of your decisions 'are not really yours' but have been 'programmed in'.
Some will be surprised to see that the latter does have an effect but few will not recognise that as an entire answer to our actions - they fail miserably.
