Atheism feels shunned...

[Purple Rabbit]

Then define free thought for me.

Does he have to? After all he doesn't claim it exists, others do! I agree with Ev 100% on this one ... the existence of free will (freedom of thought) is an assumption because there is no objective way of assessing whether what we thing is freedom of thought actually exists.

Kyu

Indeed he has to. He claims that it is has validity to us:

Whatever we call 'free' and 'choices' is what is free and choices 'to us'.

Eh? I said it's defined by whoever defines it. Whatever it is 'to us'. I believe our 'choices' are entirely mechanical and there's no evidence to the contrary whatsoever (that I know of). I'm not defining free thought, I'm saying whatever you call it and however it's defined...that doesn't stop our choices from being entirely mechanical...like I said: I know of no evidence to contradict that. Calling something free doesn't make it free - as in it's not evidence that everything isn't just mechanical (whether in a deterministic universe or indeterministic universe...unpredictability doesn't give credence to the ability to make non-mechanical choices).

EvF

I am not yet totally sure what that means but I'll try to rephrase it in my words to try to get a grip on it.
I hope you wanna comment on my interpretation. I should underline that it is my INTERPRETATION, I do not claim to use phrasing that accurately describes your thought. I state this explicitly since Kyu is so keen on making a huge who-claimed-what argument out of this.

hmmm....I do not hear you saying that free will does not exist, only that it has relative existence..."it's defined by whoever defines it".

So what do you mean with that relative existence? Do you mean that it only exists relative to the human mind which exists in absolute sense (in the Descartian way of cogito ergo sum), to emphasize dependence on the mind, i.e. free will can only exist in the (human) mind. In that case it boils down to some kind of existence to me and I would not conclude that free will is non existent. Like numbers are dependent on the mind but are real to me. Or maybe your emphasis is on the fact that what we perceive as free choice is not rooted in the workings of the world, that we cannot claim to controll the material world directly with our relative free will. Then the existence of free will would depend on your definition of it. Does your definition of free will require that some form of direct control over events in the material world takes place. This in fact was my reason to ask for your definition. Please help me out here.