Free will and determinism

[CoreyD]

All decisions we make are determined by existing and prior influences. There has been an effectively infinite chain of events which has resulted in me sitting here writing this sentence. They have all led to this point. From the major events - I was born at a specific time and place, to the minor ones - it's raining today, to the seemingly inconsequential - I broke a string on my guitar last night.

There is no way that existence cannot be described other than determined.

The question is then not whether we make decisions that affect the trajectory of future events - I obviously decided to do this rather than something else. But if free will is defined as the ability to make decisions that are not determined by prior events and we could rerun the last hour exactly as it happened and make a different decision, then something actually needs to be different. But rerunning it exactly as it happened means that nothing is different.

So free will cannot be compatible with determinism. And if existence is deterministic then free will is an illusion.

If freewill is a reality, existence is not deterministic, and the notion that "all decisions we make are determined by existing and prior influences" is a fantasy developed in a mind that presupposes determinism.

Determinism is the philosophical view that all events in the universe, including human decisions and actions, are causally inevitable. Deterministic theories throughout the history of philosophy have developed from diverse and sometimes overlapping motives and considerations.

A wise and educated man wrote:

See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, which are based on human tradition and the spiritual forces of the world rather than on Christ.​

- Colossians 2:8 - Letter of the apostle Paul​

 

[CoreyD]

If you could give me a personal event that had no cause, that was not determined by anything at all, then I'd be wrong.

Edit: When I say determinism, I am talking about causal determinism.

I chose not to plant cabbage... but I can do so the minute you tell me, it was determined that I don't plant cabbage, and I can choose either or, without telling you my choice, and it would not be based on anything you said, or did not say.

How will you prove that my decision to plant cabbage, or not plant cabbage had a predetermined cause?

 

[CoreyD]

The problem is, when you have a god that sends his finite little creations to be tortured in a place that he created...
You have to come up with some sort of get out of jail free card under the guise of "freewill" That way you can say stuff like "God doesn't send anyone to hell... they choose to go there"

Free will is a functional doctrine, but certainly not a scriptural one.

How can that be true, when millions of people do not believe in a so-called hellfire that God torments the wicked in, but yet they believe in freewill?
One does not follow the other, and are in no way connected.

Freewill was in existence before any idea of a hellfire doctrine.

 

[CoreyD]

I agree. I don't know any religion where it's not an absolute requirement. That we must be held responsible for our actions. That, coupled with the fact that it's virtually impossible not to think that we have it maintains the belief that it exists. I have to admit that emotionally I find it difficult to come to terms with it myself.

Deuteronomy 30:19, 20 is from one existing person, to other existing persons... like a father to his children.
There are persons who are not religious in any way, but who teach their children of consequences for their actions.
It does not have anything to do with religion, but is a basic principle, like laws and principles that we come to know about, through experience.

After all, no scientist got up one morning, and told us that the universe is governed by certain fundamental laws and principles.

 

[CoreyD]

I've been mulling this one over for a while and I've come to a conclusion similar to yours but without the need for any form of determinism.

Basically:

1. The Universe is made up of matter/energy/forces whose actions and interactions are controlled by a range of known and unknown physical laws and rules
2. Humans are a part of the Universe and, as such can only act in a way which is consistent with these physical laws
3. Therefore, free will cannot exist

If humans had the ability to act in a way which is different to an outcome determined by physical laws then, by definition, physical laws cannot exist as laws - physics would be chaos.

It doesn't matter if the laws of physics are deterministic or random. The issue is accepting that humans do not have the power to interfere with these laws.

OB

Hmm. Can you explain please, how physical laws govern consciousness, or conscious decisions?

 

[CoreyD]

If it's random, then that almost by definition excludes free will.

How so?
Can you please explain.

If it's deterministic than there might be some compatibilist argument for free will. But I've never heard one that came close to convincing me. So...I have eventually come to a decision.

Okay, so if the laws of the universe are determined - that is, fixed by an intelligent mind, you would accept free will?
How would anyone convince you that the laws of the universe are fixed, and ordered by an intelligent designer?
I'm sure you have been given evidence before.
How did you treat that evidence, and how would you treat any new evidence?

How do you take this what was said by one who was shown how limited human are, at Job 38:19-38, for example?

 

[CoreyD]

Exactly right.

That can't be true, and here is why.
I believe it is wrong to do X, but I still chose to do X.
My interests are in doing Y, but I chose not to do Y.
My free-willed choices are not determined solely by my beliefs and interests.

A free-willed choice is not predetermined, Nor determined. It is made, and can take several directions, before it is actually completed.

 

[CoreyD]

Very insightful! Since causality determines the outcome of every unfolding event, then everything that will ever occur is exactly how it should be. The present is the product of the past, and the future the present.

Free will is illusory on many levels, including on this idea of causality. Our biological response to certain circumstances also has a hand in our decision-making. We are conscious of the unfolding of creation, while seemingly participating in the experience of it. We are the witness of the Universe unraveling itself. It can seem incredible, terrifying, and exciting all at the same time.

I am reminded of persons who are told... and even believe, that they turned out the way they did, or will turn out the way they do, because it is determined, and they can't help it.
In fact, one man who "loves his liquor", told me this,

However, many have proved that notion false.
One character in the Bible, is Hezekiah... who did not turn out like his father, and grandfather, and though some persons' circumstances in life, was such, to drive them in a particular direction, they took another... simply by the choices they decided to make, against the choices that were more likely.

Really, the philosophical thinking presented in the OP, is not as insightful as it may appear.
In fact, the way our mind works, sometimes what is so great to us, is often seen that way, because of the choices we make, or want to make - our free-willed choices.

Free will does exist.
It's not often wanted though.
It reminds me of consequences. Some regret there being any.... at least where their choices are concerned.

 

[CoreyD]

Oops. I did not realize this thread was 136 pages long.
I got carried away since it's one of my favorite topics.

 

[Bradskii]

I suppose the most signficant way he would differ is in his continual self-deception as he has to constantly imagine himself not making decisions(or making decisions that aren't really decisions)...and the question is why would he go to such lengths to keep himself convinced? If he doesn't have free will, why does he keep needing to remind himself of such a thing?

No, what would he actually do differently? How would you recognise that his life was different?

I'll cut this short as I don't see much chance of anything worthwhile coming from this. So I'll tell you. You wouldn't. Decisions are made for reasons that are beyond our control whether free will exists or not. He still goes to work each day. He still decides what he's going to do when he gets there. He still loves his wife and kids. He still reads the books he likes. He still worries about his weight. He still gets angry if someone cuts him off in traffic. He still decides to have chocolate as opposed to vanilla...

You wouldn't have any idea about his beliefs regarding free will because next to nothing changes. What he might tell you if you were interested is that he's less judgemental.

I chose not to plant cabbage... but I can do so the minute you tell me, it was determined that I don't plant cabbage, and I can choose either or, without telling you my choice, and it would not be based on anything you said, or did not say.

How will you prove that my decision to plant cabbage, or not plant cabbage had a predetermined.

You'll tell me why you did it.

 

[CoreyD]

If factors lead on to a certain decision, then something led to the factors. Nothing comes from nothing.

Mark. If one can make a decision, either or, then the factor has nothing to do with the decision.
For example, a girl got raped, and is pregnant. She can choose to keep the baby, or terminate the life in her.
It's a choice.
What if she decided to get an abortion, but then decides not to?
What determined her decision?

The factor - the rape, did not.
Did something else determine her decision?
Her mom talked with her, and something her mom said, gave her "food for thought" .
She made a choice, or decision, through thought processes.

Those thought processes may even go contrary to her mom's advise, but still not be affected by the factors in the past.
They may be affected by factors in the future.
She may start to think of what life will be like for her, and a baby.
That may be the "factor" that influences her decision - factors way ahead... in the future.

Do you see the flaw in the philosophy of determinism?
A freewill choice, or decision, is not determined by a cause.

 

[Fervent]

No, what would he actually do differently? How would you recognise that his life was different?

I stated what would be different...his constant need to re-affirm his denial. He couldn't live as if he truly believed that, and would need to constantly remind himself that he is just a wind-up toy with no ability to change his course.

I'll cut this short as I don't see much chance of anything worthwhile coming from this. So I'll tell you. You wouldn't. Decisions are made for reasons that are beyond our control whether free will exists or not. He still goes to work each day. He still decides what he's going to do when he gets there. He still loves his wife and kids. He still reads the books he likes. He still worries about his weight. He still gets angry if someone cuts him off in traffic. He still decides to have chocolate as opposed to vanilla..

That's quite the assertion, especially when I have identified how his life would change. He would have to constantly deny what can be plainly known, and I would only wonder at his motive for doing so. If you don't believe anything changes whether we believe we have free will or not, then why not just accept free will as genuine? You obviously think your deniial of free wiil has some significant value, but you've offered no reason for anyone to beliieve so. In fact, you seem to be arguing here that it doesn't matter one way or the other.

 

[CoreyD]

You'll tell me why you did it.

No. I made a freewill choice not to.

 

[Bradskii]

I stated what would be different...his constant need to re-affirm his denial. He couldn't live as if he truly believed that, and would need to constantly remind himself that he is just a wind-up toy with no ability to change his course.

That's quite the assertion, especially when I have identified how his life would change. He would have to constantly deny what can be plainly known, and I would only wonder at his motive for doing so. If you don't believe anything changes whether we believe we have free will or not, then why not just accept free will as genuine? You obviously think your deniial of free wiil has some significant value, but you've offered no reason for anyone to beliieve so. In fact, you seem to be arguing here that it doesn't matter one way or the other.

So you can't think of anything he would do differently. It's not surprising, because hardly anything is different. The guy still loves his wife and kids. He still applies for the job he has. He still lives where he does. He still goes skiing. Because there are reasons for all of this this. That's what determinism means. That you have reasons for what you do. The reasons determine your choices.

What would be absolutely astonishing would be you making a choice for no reason at all. If you decide to go somewhere on holiday and a friend quite reasonably asks you 'What determined that you picked that place?' it would be ridiculous for you to say 'Nothing'. But that's the position that you hold. And you've made no attempt to tell us how that works.

 

[CoreyD]

If we have no control over a decision then it obviously cannot be described as free will. The vast majority of the decisions 'we' make are made subconsciously. Just consider exactly what you are doing at this instant.

Ah. Good.
So, if we have control over a decision we make, the opposite is true, then. We do have freewill.
Does the girl in my scenario have control over the decision she makes?

 

[Bradskii]

No. I made a freewill choice not to.

So why did you decide that? Was it a random decision (in which case there was no will involved) or was there a reason that determined your choice? If so, what was it?

 

[Fervent]

So you can't think of anything he would do differently. It's not surprising, because hardly anything is different. The guy still loves his wife and kids. He still applies for the job he has. He still lives where he does. He still goes skiing. Because there are reasons for all of this this. That's what determinism means. That you have reasons for what you do. The reasons determine your choices.

I stated somethng he would do differently. "Hardly anythng" is not nothing, and the one difference is his constantly needing to convince himself that what he knows is true is in fact an illusion. Which just leaves the questions of why he would choose to attempt to convince himself of something like that? What is the benefit, if it supposedly changes nothing?

What would be absolutely astonishing would be you making a choice for no reason at all. If you decide to go somewhere on holiday and a friend quite reasonably asks you 'What determined that you picked that place?' it would be ridiculous for you to say 'Nothing'. But that's the position that you hold. And you've made no attempt to tell us how that works.

This is rather nonsensical as far as argumentation goes. Because you're conflating purpose with predetermination. You claim hardly anything changes, so why go to the lengths necessary to convince yourself that you are a meat puppet dancing to the beat of a mindless universe?

 

[Bradskii]

Ah. Good.
So, if we have control over a decision we make, the opposite is true, then. We do have freewill.
Does the girl in my scenario have control over the decision she makes?

If she is not coerced. In which case what she chooses will be what she prefers to do.

 

[Bradskii]

Which just leaves the questions of why he would choose to attempt to convince himself of something like that?

You think people try to convince themselves? What an extremely odd notion.

This is rather nonsensical as far as argumentation goes. Because you're conflating purpose with predetermination. You claim hardly anything changes, so why go to the lengths necessary to convince yourself that you are a meat puppet dancing to the beat of a mindless universe?

You didn't address the point that was made. That it would be nonsensical to tell someone that nothing determined your choice. If nothing did then you've made no attempt whatsoever to explain how that could possibly work. Nobody has even attempted that.

 

[CoreyD]

Because there are reasons for all of this this. That's what determinism means. That you have reasons for what you do. The reasons determine your choices.

Can you please clarify how, and from where, you are defining determinism?
Determinism
noun

1. The philosophical doctrine that every state of affairs, including every human event, act, and decision, is the inevitable consequence of antecedent states of affairs.
2. The doctrine that the will is not free, but is inevitably and invincibly determined by motives, preceding events, and natural laws.
3. The doctrine that all actions are determined by the current state and immutable laws of the universe, with no possibility of choice.

Reason and choice are not exclusive, by any possible means.
One can have a motive, and yet have a reason to go against that motive.

If you are arguing that determinism is reason... Is that what you are saying? Then there is obviously freewill, because freewill involves reason, and thus, in that case, you cannot exclude freewill with determinism.

Deuteronomy 30:19, 20 reads.
19 I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you today that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing. Therefore choose life, so that you and your descendants may live,
20 and that you may love the LORD your God, obey Him, and hold fast to Him. For He is your life, and He will prolong your life in the land that the LORD swore to give to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.”

There is reason in choices.
I plant a tree for a reason. No one makes a decision for no reason.
That would be next to not thinking, but just acting, and that is not what anybody does.
Yet, they are not acting based on what has been determined.

Some philosophical arguments do seem to create ideas that seem more paradoxical than anything known to man.
There is no reason to separate reason and choice, and we can't use determinism to drive a wedge between them. That won't work.

What would be absolutely astonishing would be you making a choice for no reason at all.

That is correct.

If you decide to go somewhere on holiday and a friend quite reasonably asks you 'What determined that you picked that place?' it would be ridiculous for you to say 'Nothing'. But that's the position that you hold. And you've made no attempt to tell us how that works.

What determined that a person chose to go Venezuela, or Hawaii, for a vacation?
They made a choice of their own free will to go somewhere they had not been before.
It's a free-willed choice, and yes, the choice is not made randomly, or without purpose. That is a given.