Is free will an illusion?

We have choice, but the greater power in our governing world has set absolutes to which we are forced to abide. I may choose not to eat, but I would die. I may choose to jump off a cliff unaided, but I would fall - most likely to my death. I am not free to do whatever I please.
 

Maybe I don't think deeply enough and sometimes I use big words I don't always fully understand, in an effort to make myself sound more photosynthesis. I have choices throughout my daily life from the time I chose to get out of bed, to time I chose to return. Invariably I exercise free will with little thought. And if I chose not to stay between the lines drawn by the will of a greater power in our governing world, then that choice is of my own free will ... but I would give that decision some thought ... hopefully.
 
Instead of spewing terse comments on a subject with a long philosophical history one ought at least understand basics about this ridiculously boring subject strangled by language abstractions, lest one appear foolishly ignorant.

Free will - Wikipedia

As I essentially stated earlier, its garbage. A subject relevant in earlier centuries but not so in this science technology era. The reason it is still debated is due to all the religious philosophers that will never let go of their belief "God" knows everything in the past and future as in omniscient determinism. IMO just illogical garbage not supported by anything but vague, narrowly rationalized, Bible scripture. Much like reams of other Christian religious dogma long after Jesus was flesh and blood that supposedly was "inspired" by holy philosophers God must be communicating with because they have been declared so by churches.

So folks, yes this is just another religious debate like the nonsense of Bible inerrancy or young earth creationism. So you want to believe Satan The Devil is the reason you or others sin, embrace the concept we have no free will. That way you might be "saved" by entering their flock and repenting. My input reflects what John Locke wrote.

snippets:

John Locke denied that the phrase "free will" made any sense. He also took the view that the truth of determinism was irrelevant. He believed that the defining feature of voluntary behavior was that individuals have the ability to postpone a decision long enough to reflect or deliberate upon the consequences of a choice: "...the will in truth, signifies nothing but a power, or ability, to prefer or choose".

The underlying questions are whether we have control over our actions, and if so, what sort of control, and to what extent. These questions predate the early Greek stoics. On one hand, humans have a strong sense of freedom, which leads them to believe that they have free will. On the other hand, an intuitive feeling of free will could be mistaken. [according to deniers]

It is difficult to reconcile the intuitive evidence that conscious decisions are causally effective with the view that the physical world can be explained entirely by physical law. The conflict between intuitively felt freedom and natural law arises when either causal closure or physical determinism (nomological determinism) is asserted. With causal closure, no physical event has a cause outside the physical domain, and with physical determinism, the future is determined entirely by preceding events (cause and effect).

The puzzle of reconciling 'free will' with a deterministic universe is known as the problem of free will or sometimes referred to as the dilemma of determinism. This dilemma leads to a moral dilemma as well: the question of how to assign responsibility for actions if they are caused entirely by past events.

Compatibilists maintain that mental reality is not of itself causally effective. Classical compatibilists have addressed the dilemma of free will by arguing that free will holds as long as humans are not externally constrained or coerced. Modern compatibilists make a distinction between freedom of will and freedom of action, that is, separating freedom of choice from the freedom to enact it. Given that humans all experience a sense of free will, some modern compatibilists think it is necessary to accommodate this intuition. Compatibilists often associate freedom of will with the ability to make rational decisions.

A different approach to the dilemma is that of incompatibilists, namely, that if the world is deterministic, then our feeling that we are free to choose an action is simply an illusion. Metaphysical libertarianism is the form of incompatibilism which posits that determinism is false and free will is possible (at least some people have free will). This view is associated with non-materialist constructions, including both traditional dualism, as well as models supporting more minimal criteria; such as the ability to consciously veto an action or competing desire. Yet even with physical indeterminism, arguments have been made against libertarianism in that it is difficult to assign Origination (responsibility for "free" indeterministic choices).

Causal determinism is the concept that events within a given paradigm are bound by causality in such a way that any state (of an object or event) is completely determined by prior states.

Omniscience is the capacity to know everything that there is to know (included in which are all future events), and is a property often attributed to a creator deity. Omniscience implies the existence of destiny. Some authors have claimed that free will cannot coexist with omniscience.

Predeterminism is the idea that all events are determined in advance. Predeterminism is the philosophy that all events of history, past, present and future, have been decided or are known (by God, fate, or some other force), including human actions.

Theological determinism is a form of determinism stating that all events that happen are pre-ordained, or predestined to happen, by a monotheistic deity, or that they are destined to occur given its omniscience.
 

Last edited:
Gardenlover said:
I don't understand why some people have such a hard time considering that there is something bigger than themselves in the universe. Science doesn't hold all the answers either.
Click to expand...

I would go so far as to place the something bigger nearer than the universe out there; there is more to us than is up to our whim.
 
Last edited:
As far as free will is concerned, I could go out and shoot the next guy I saw. But, of course, I would really not do such a thing. Now, since I won't do that, doesn't mean that I don't have free will. There's something stopping me. One of the things why AI works is that humans are extremely predictable. We must have some kind of internal human programing. When you think of the crimes humans do to one another, they are essentially the same crimes ancients did thousands and thousands of years ago. If we are that predictable, there has to be a reason for the predictability.
 
Gardenlover said:
I don't understand why some people have such a hard time considering that there is something bigger than themselves in the universe. Science doesn't hold all the answers either.
Click to expand...
I think it's that you believe in a deity, and others do not. Your universe works very well with a deity. Obviously, others believe their universe works very well without a deity. In the long run, it doesn't matter, both are still human beings.
 
fuzzybuddy said:
I think it's that you believe in a deity, and others do not. Your universe works very well with a deity. Obviously, others believe their universe works very well without a deity. In the long run, it doesn't matter, both are still human beings.
Click to expand...

Not addressed to me but in my case I don't believe in deities but I do believe in what might be called a higher power. Not one welded by a god but one intrinsic to the cosmos as a whole - of which we are a part. That isn't available for empirical verification, of course. It is a conclusion some arrive at by way of the arts and philosophy. Entirely hypothetical just like all the alternatives which lead to the apprehension that "we are .. lonely, isolated, predatory egos .. hurled into an alien universe, mere accidents of cosmic history, whose lives, like the cosmos itself, are pitifully devoid of meaning, purpose and value."

There is no evidence whatsoever that I am aware of for accepting material determinism, the conclusion that the moral, cultural, intellectual, vocational choices of man are determined by material factors. I definitely do not argue that the world is poofed into being from nothing by a kind of genie for reasons of its own. I only point out that arguments for either conclusion are essentially exercises in tautological argument. As such what we believe will be determined by which perspective we find better answers to our needs as embodied living beings.
 
Last edited:
MarciKS said:
I have yet to meet a single person that has ever not done just whatever the hell they wanted to. Yes there are rules and policies and laws put into place but Americans seem to be big on doing what they want despite the law. They don't give a crap. So I believe you do have free will. Because we see it every day when people do whatever they want just because they can and they refuse to be told what to do.

Regardless of whether it's for safety or anything else. To sit here and say you don't have free will is ridiculous because laws and rules are handled with such disregard today that there's no way you can say you're not free to do what you want. People make the choice to be selfish and do as they please every single day.

People are free to go out and commit crimes and hurt people every day. They're free to decide whether or not they want vaccines in the midst of a pandemic. They are free to not pay their taxes. Being free of punishment is another matter. You have choices and you make them every day in everything you do.

There is no one standing with a gun to your head to stop you. So tired of people whining about their rights and their freedoms when they have so much more than some of these other countries. And they just do what they want anyway so I don't understand the complaint.
Click to expand...

I think you've misunderstood the topic. Of course, we should start with a definition of what we mean by free will, which I asked in my first post in the thread. But a thief deciding to go steal a car isn't exercising free will at the level we're discussing. We're talking that higher level of free will. So it would come down - why is it that the person chooses to steal? Are they free to not steal? It's at the psychological level, not the physical. IMO.
 
chic said:
Yes, I believe so. So much is made of free will. But, are our decisions really free? Or heavily influenced one way or another. If you believe we have free will, what makes you think so? Can you explain?

The past three years have taught me that we are only free if we are obedient to the will of a greater power in our governing world. This makes you think and think again because if you buck the trend and really choose freely, you could be destroyed, or so very nearly that your life never makes sense again. It's something to think about.
Click to expand...
I believe we all have free will, of course our decisions in life are influenced by outside occurrences and circumstances, but that does not take away our free will to do as we please. We have the free will to do whatever we please, but if it's against the law, etc., there may be consequences.

You mention the past three years and our 'governing world', so I'm thinking your concern about free will has more to do with a governing world you disagree with. You still have free will, as Marci said, you aren't forced to get a vaccination, etc. You have the free will not to accept recommendations by professionals.
 
I believe I'm able to exercise free will to the extent the choices I make are made within the norms of a civilized society.
 
bobcat said:
I suppose it depends on what is meant by "free". In the abstract, there is no such thing as an uncaused event or effect. Everything is caused by something. Much of what happens in human behavior is the result of the unconscious mind, which means we simply aren't aware of it. So if you're not aware of the cause for what you do, then is it really free will?

The human mind is complex. Oftentimes, our morals, ethics, values, principles, fears, etc... play a big part in what we do, even though we may not be aware of their influence. So I think free will is a vague concept with a rather loose interpretation.
Click to expand...
Best answer yet. Many unseen subtleties in the human mind.
 
I choose to behave AS IF I have free will. My choices of conduct are indeed influenced by my past personal history, the expectations of my social peers, the constraints of the law of the land and also by my realistic assessments of what I'm able to do. But those are influences, not mandatory controls. My personal will is a big part of the equation. As are the practical expectations of the consequences of my behavior.
I say that with freedom of choice comes responsibility.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top