Oh no not another free will thread.

[Edwardo Piet]

I'm afraid so.

There's two conceptions of free will:

1: Compatabilist free will.
2. Incompatabilist free will.

Compatabilist free will stems from the philosophical view compatabilism, which is the view that free will can be compatible with determinism. In philosophy, determinism is the view that there is at any given moment exactly one physically possible future and all events can be traced back to prior causes, stretching back to the big bang and further if needed, to the first cause.

This means that in determinism, any action you take is determined by prior causes... so you couldn't have possibility done otherwise.

Now, whether you believe determinism is true or not, compatabilist free will is so loosely defined that it's possible even in such a universe. Meaning, even if you can't do anything other than you do... free will is still possible. How so? Because on the compatabilist view, all 'free will' means is to not be psychotic, not be drugged, to be a legal adult, to not be hypnotized, to not be coerced. It's just the free will in the sense that is meant in the legal system, the legal sense of free will. Or what is meant when asked the question "Are you signing this contract of your own free will?". It means, are you a responsible adult capable of making such decisions, are you mentally mature, are you being coerced?

If that's all free will is, then of course it exists. There's a big difference between your brain leading you to behaviors when you're fully sober and sane, and your brain leading you to behaviors when you're say, drunk, or psychotic, or you have a gun to your head. Obviously, your 'free will' is violated when you aren't in a sober state or you're being threatened by violence, or you're psychotic, etc.

The problem is most people believe in more than that. Most people do believe that they can do otherwise in exactly the same situation. Most people believe determinism is false, or they simply don't think about it. Most people may think that quantum mechanics supports indeterminism, because quantum events can't be unpredictable.

There's some problems with that 1) Quantum unpredictability just means the scientists are unable to predict it, it doesn't mean it doesn't all have prior causes that are ultimately determined and 2) Being uncaused doesn't give you any more freedom in this strong sense. If your behavior is caused by quantum randomness or unpredictability, you aren't any more responsible for it than if you were determined. To be able to have free will in the strong sense incompatible with determinism, you would have to not only not be determined, but you'd have to be able to fully determine yourself, meaning ,you had no causes at all. Meaning even all the way back to the big bang,... you'd still have to be causing yourself. You'd have to be a self-causing agent, which is impossible. Even if God is the first cause, even he can't do that. Because then, he didn't create himself... he was already there. And if he did create himself, he had to already be there to create himself. Same problem all over again. It's impossible to be what in Latin is called causai sui... or self-causing. And yet that is what most people believe in.

So there you go, ANOTHER free will thread. Bloody hell I've done multiple myself on AF over the years. It would be funny to go back to see my older threads and further and further back when I was younger, see how slightly different my approach was, and also how much more incoherent I was when I was younger. And how my spelling and punctuation was worse back then lol (I was 19 and full of lithium when I joined AF lol)

This one was to end the digression in the newly departed thread!