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!

[Foxaèr]

I completely believe in free will.

I do have the free will to choose whether I will wear the green shirt or the blue shirt. Any time a choice is offered and an individual is allowed the opportunity to choose between multiple options, that means free will is in play.

I know some people make the claim that if an Omni-being exists, that cancels out free will. I disagree. It's no different than being psychic; just because one can see the future and what someone will choose to do does not mean that there is no room for alteration of the path already seen.

[Edwardo Piet]

I completely believe in free will.

I do have the free will to choose whether I will wear the green shirt or the blue shirt.

In exactly the same circumstances when the universe is in exactly the same state?

Any time a choice is offered and an individual is allowed the opportunity to choose between multiple options, that means free will is in play.

Do you not believe in causation?

I know some people make the claim that if an Omni-being exists, that cancels out free will.  I disagree.  It's no different than being psychic; just because one can see the future and what someone will choose to do does not mean that there is no room for alteration of the path already seen.

You don't seem to understand the concept of the future then. If an omniscient being knows the future it means it knows what will happen. So, you can't do anything other than what it knows you will do.

[Angrboda]

[The Grand Nudger]

@Lut
To paraphrase a wise man (E. Scrooge), are these things that will be, or things that could be, maybe?  

The former rules out classical free will.  The latter, maybe not..and it;s usually the grist for the mill on stories about people who change their destiny (so to speak).  There's a subtle difference in precognition in mythological stories between characters and traditions.  We have cassandra, for example..cursed to see a future that will be but that no one will believe.  Countless seers and sorcerors that see things that can be, maybe. 

Omni god belongs to the first category. Not some rando seer who divines potential futures from pig entrails....but a being that knows the actual future. You do what it knows you will, every time. You can do no other, or it never knew to begin with.

[Foxaèr]

You don't seem to understand the concept of the future then. If an omniscient being knows the future it means it knows what will happen. So, you can't do anything other than what it knows you will do.

Incorrect.

The knowing is in no way set in stone.

[Edwardo Piet]

We're not talking about a being that sorta kinda knows lol. An omniscient being has absolute knowledge.

[Mystic]

I believe knowing the future absolutely means no free-will is possible, this is why Imam Ali (as) condemned a person (a non-Muslim) predicting the fate of Imam Ali's battles on the stars.

[Edwardo Piet]

Oh dear Kitkat, how embarassing is this for you? Even MK gets it lol.

[Foxaèr]

@Lut
To paraphrase a wise man (E. Scrooge), are these things that will be, or things that can be, maybe?  

The former rules out classical free will.  The latter, maybe not..and it;s usually the grist for the mill on stories about people who change their destiny (so to speak).  There's a subtle difference in precognition in mythological stories between characters and traditions.  We have cassandra, for example..cursed to see a future that will be but that no one will believe.  Countless seers and sorcerors that see things that can be, maybe. 

Omni god belongs to the first category. Not some rando seer who divines potential futures from pig entrails....but a being that knows the actual future. You do what it knows you will, every time. You can do no other, or it never knew to begin with.

Knowing the actual future still does not eradicate free will.

Just because the being knows that you will choose the blue shirt over the green shirt does not mean there still wasn't a choice and that you still did not have the free will to choose between the two colored shirts.

A true absence of free will is an absence of choice. The being did not alter the future in any way to make you choose one colored shirt over another; rather, the being simply knew which colored shirt you would choose.