Free will

[Shadow_Man]

Alasdair Ham,

Shadow Man,

Do you believe in free will and if so is it compatible with determinism and hence meaningless or incompatible and hence logically incoherent? Those are the two options.

We were talking about that before, but that discussion kind of fell off the map. I am happy to take it up again. By all means justify that you are presenting logical options, and that they are the only two possibilities.

Here is your original post -

If determinism is true, libertarian free will cannot exist.
If indeterminism is true, libertarian free will cannot exist.

In both cases compatabilist free will can exist, but it is simply "will" being redefined as "free will", it's a silly definition that dodges the genuine question.

And here is approximately where we were -

"Will"=Willpower. The dictionary can define that one, same for "free". "Free will" is a willpower that is free. A compatabilist believes that free will is compatible with determinism, but the only kind of will compatible with determinism is the will with the kind of freedom that no one doubts humans have -- just normal human willpower. The only "free" added to that beyond that could be libertarian free will, which is impossible as explained above. Without that it's just ordinary willpower. So compatabilists may call it "free will" but they're just talking about ordinary willpower and calling it "free". That is why I personally think it's silly.

When I speak of free will, I am speaking of our ability to make up our own minds and make our own choices within our ability to enact them. It includes the concept that we could have done otherwise. In your definitions, does that correspond to Libertarian Free Will, what you are calling Normal Human Willpower, or something else entirely?

Do you define Normal Human Willpower to allow that we could have done otherwise? If so, is there some other characteristic of Libertarian Free Will that sets it apart from Normal Human Willpower?

I'm tired and drunk but I don't want to forget to respond to you, I hope to give you a better response at anotehr time.

For now I will say that:

Indeterminism implies literally that we "could have done otherwise" but as I said above it also implies that we cannot determine ourselves and therefore can't will ourselves. "could have done otherwise" is more than just the literal meaning, it means "could have done otherwise using ones own will, could have willed it the way we chose it to be willed", the kind of "could have done otherwise" in indeterminism is the same kind of "could have done otherwise" that a bunch of dice or a roulette real has, that's not free will.

To move forward from there, we must first understand what determinism and indeterminism are, and to what do they apply. Then we can add the layer of understanding their implications. You appear to be jumping the gun by including your understanding of their implications within the definitions themselves. If you cannot define them without resorting to what you think they imply, then don't bother trying to define them; quote an existing definition.

Remember that the implications are what this whole thread is contesting, so you must justify that you have logiced your way to correct ones. It is insufficient to just assert them.

So -
What is determinism?
Here is a possible definition -
When a set of influences impact upon a sentient entity, that entity must necessarily react in one and only one way. It cannot do otherwise.

What is indeterminism?
It is "not-determinism," so here is a possible definition -
When a set of influences impact upon a sentient entity, that entity is free to react in any way it chooses, within its own ability to enact those choices. It can readily do otherwise.

You say that "no one doubts humans have" Normal Human Willpower.
Does Normal Human Willpower allow that we can do otherwise?

It occurs to me that what I previously said to IATIA also seems to apply to you.

The observed nature of our free will is that it is not at all random. Quite to the contrary, it is thoughtful and purposeful. That was my point. You seem to be saying that there are only two things in operation in the universe - specific determinism or randomness. I am saying that there is at least a third thing - human cognition and the free will it engenders. The observed nature of our free will is that it is neither specifically determined nor random.

The important point being that our free will is observed every bit as much as are causation and randomness.

Regards,
Shadow_Man