If free will was not real

[bennyboy]

If you'd rather my criticism refer to intent, then so be it, but good luck with will as you define it, when intent is under the bus.  Your definition of will specifically referenced it.  The terms are redundant in context, and as such all questions and criticisms of one apply equally to the other.

I'm kind of mystified why you would choose to define will in such a way as that my inability to fly could be taken to mean that I do not have the will to fly, or perhaps even will.

I'm fine with the ambiguity. In the case of a lost leg, I can no more walk than I can fly. I can still generate the intent, but there is no longer the capacity to manifest it in reality.

I'm open to redefining definitions and looking at new angles. In fact, I've already started doing this already in this thread. But let me give a specific example, so you know what I mean by "will." Let's say I want to move my arm. I form the intent to move it, and then I will it-- the "will" being something like a wish almost. I do not really know how my arm moves-- I just want it to, and it does. That's what I mean by will. Now, if I'm in an environment in which I can move my arm back and forth as much as I want, at a whim, then I'd say I have free will, at least in regard to that behavior.

But I'm perfectly willing to carry on a discussion under whatever definition you want to propose, and perhaps the outcome will be different.