I think it is helpful in talking about free will to have some examples where we would definitely say that there is no free will and other cases where we are more likely to say that there is. Since free will seems to be about making choices, I will focus on that aspect of things.
As a first example, suppose that I step/am pushed/or otherwise exit a flying airplane well above the ground. At that point I do NOT have the 'choice' to not fall. Even if I *really* want to not fall, the inevitable fact will be that I will fall. I simply do not have 'free will' to choose to not fall.
On the other hand, taking the example above, if I am in a grocery store, I can choose to but one brand of OJ over another. But what does it mean to say that choice is 'free'? does it mean that in spite of all my experiences, preferences, and all other variables, I *could* choose the other brand? But why would I? If my experiences, preferences, and tastes are not enough to make a free choice in line with them, what is the value of 'free will'? At that point, it doesn't sound, to me, like a 'free' choice, but rather that it is an arbitrary choice.
Going further, I would say that the choice is *mine* if the primary determiners of the outcome are, in fact, my preferences, my experiences, my emotions, and my internal state as opposed to something external to me being the primary causal factor for the following events (as it would be for falling from a plane). And having 'free will' would mean that the choice was *mine* in that sense.
What bothers people about this notion of free will is that those preferences, emotions, and experiences might be determined in ways that 'don't involve me'. but, of course, the fact that I have certain preferences is, at least partially, determined by my past experiences and my reactions to those past experiences. That also seems perfectly good and reasonable. I would not want to have my preferences NOT determined by my past experiences and reactions! That would seem to be very 'un-free'!
Ultimately, this seems to be compatible with determinism and materialism. The choices are *mine*: they happen in my brain, based on my experiences, my memories, and my preferences. Those preferences are determined my my previous experiences and how I reacted to them. Even in a deterministic system, I *am* the one 'making choices', even if those choices are determined: they are determined by who I am and how I see the world.
Unless, of course, I jump out of an airplane without a parachute.
As a first example, suppose that I step/am pushed/or otherwise exit a flying airplane well above the ground. At that point I do NOT have the 'choice' to not fall. Even if I *really* want to not fall, the inevitable fact will be that I will fall. I simply do not have 'free will' to choose to not fall.
On the other hand, taking the example above, if I am in a grocery store, I can choose to but one brand of OJ over another. But what does it mean to say that choice is 'free'? does it mean that in spite of all my experiences, preferences, and all other variables, I *could* choose the other brand? But why would I? If my experiences, preferences, and tastes are not enough to make a free choice in line with them, what is the value of 'free will'? At that point, it doesn't sound, to me, like a 'free' choice, but rather that it is an arbitrary choice.
Going further, I would say that the choice is *mine* if the primary determiners of the outcome are, in fact, my preferences, my experiences, my emotions, and my internal state as opposed to something external to me being the primary causal factor for the following events (as it would be for falling from a plane). And having 'free will' would mean that the choice was *mine* in that sense.
What bothers people about this notion of free will is that those preferences, emotions, and experiences might be determined in ways that 'don't involve me'. but, of course, the fact that I have certain preferences is, at least partially, determined by my past experiences and my reactions to those past experiences. That also seems perfectly good and reasonable. I would not want to have my preferences NOT determined by my past experiences and reactions! That would seem to be very 'un-free'!
Ultimately, this seems to be compatible with determinism and materialism. The choices are *mine*: they happen in my brain, based on my experiences, my memories, and my preferences. Those preferences are determined my my previous experiences and how I reacted to them. Even in a deterministic system, I *am* the one 'making choices', even if those choices are determined: they are determined by who I am and how I see the world.
Unless, of course, I jump out of an airplane without a parachute.
