Determinism, Free Will, and A Thought Experiment
January 9, 2014 at 8:32 am
(This post was last modified: January 9, 2014 at 8:38 am by Mudhammam.)
As I have been heavily pondering issues related to determinism, free will, and the like (I made a post about determinism and related ideas yesterday but don't worry, this one is going in a completely different direction), a thought experiment dawned on me. You will likely find my inspiration for it ironic but I will wait to reveal that after we have had some time to mull this over. I submit that this actually has more value than a mere thought experiment, as you will hopefully see (if I am onto anything). My thought experiment is broken into two parts. I will post Part I now and Part II tomorrow. The reason for doing it this way is that I would like to solicit responses to Part I before delving into the second half. I think there will be some value to approaching it this way, with regards to effectiveness; perhaps this will bear out when it concludes tomorrow. So here it is:
Part I.
At any particular instant, Robert has two theoretically possible options: to do Action A or some alternative, that is Action Not-A. Due to Robert's brain chemistry, which prevents Robert from doing Action Not-A, Robert always does Action A. As it happens, Robert's will* is always in agreement with his brain chemistry and thus Robert always wills himself to do Action A instead of Action Not-A. Is Robert exercising free will or is doing Action A forced on him (determined) by his brain chemistry, which prevents Robert from doing Action Not-A?
*or deep desire
Note: Action A and Action Not-A merely describe two mutually exclusive behaviors, not because they're logically exclusive at different split seconds but only because we cannot at this very particular instant do both (such as drink milk and drink not-milk, say soda, at the same exact time--well maybe someone can but hopefully you get the point--substitute whatever behaviors you'd like). Also, I'm trying to aim straight forward with this so don't read too deeply into any specific term and if you need clarification about anything, please say so.
Okay. Answers?
Part I.
At any particular instant, Robert has two theoretically possible options: to do Action A or some alternative, that is Action Not-A. Due to Robert's brain chemistry, which prevents Robert from doing Action Not-A, Robert always does Action A. As it happens, Robert's will* is always in agreement with his brain chemistry and thus Robert always wills himself to do Action A instead of Action Not-A. Is Robert exercising free will or is doing Action A forced on him (determined) by his brain chemistry, which prevents Robert from doing Action Not-A?
*or deep desire
Note: Action A and Action Not-A merely describe two mutually exclusive behaviors, not because they're logically exclusive at different split seconds but only because we cannot at this very particular instant do both (such as drink milk and drink not-milk, say soda, at the same exact time--well maybe someone can but hopefully you get the point--substitute whatever behaviors you'd like). Also, I'm trying to aim straight forward with this so don't read too deeply into any specific term and if you need clarification about anything, please say so.
Okay. Answers?
