Free will and determinism

[Bradskii]

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.

 

[AlexB23]

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.

This might be a bit more of a philosophy question, compared to an ethics question. Free will has been debated for over 2.5 millennia, so I am afraid I wouldn't be able to help you, but maybe this PDF could: Robert Waxman PhD, Five Philosophers on Free Will: Plato, Hobbes, Hume, Leibniz, and Hegel - PhilArchive

I am tempted to give your question to the private, free, somewhat open source AI (Mistral Instruct 7B) that runs on my laptop, and see what answer it will spit out. It will spit the answer out in both a secular and Biblical perspective, as some Christians here, such as myself would like to see the theological side as well. My computer's CPU is probably gonna melt, but here goes it.

Mistral Instruct 7B said:
Secular Philosophical Perspective:

Free Will and Determinism are two philosophical concepts that have been debated for centuries. The debate revolves around whether individuals have the freedom to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or whether all events, including human actions, are determined by preceding causes.

From a secular philosophical perspective, the existence of free will and determinism can be understood through various philosophical frameworks.

• Compatiblism: This view asserts that free will and determinism are not mutually exclusive but can coexist. According to this perspective, even if every event is determined by prior causes, individuals still have the illusion or experience of making free choices. This view is held by many philosophers like Arthur Schopenhauer and Baruch Spinoza.

• Incompatibilism: This view holds that free will and determinism are incompatible, meaning they cannot both be true at the same time. If determinism is true, then free will cannot exist since our choices would be predetermined. This view is held by philosophers like René Descartes.

• Indeterminism: This view asserts that some events in the universe, including human actions, are not determined by prior causes but occur randomly or spontaneously. According to this perspective, free will exists because our choices are not predetermined by prior causes. However, this view raises significant philosophical challenges, such as how to explain the origin of the randomness or the laws of nature that govern the universe.

Biblical Perspective:

The Bible presents a complex view of free will and determinism, with various passages suggesting both the existence of free will and God's sovereign control over all things.

• Free Will: The Bible teaches that humans have a moral agency to make choices between good and evil (Deuteronomy 30:19, Joshua 24:15). God created humans in His image with the capacity to choose between right and wrong (Genesis 2:16-17). Adam and Eve's fall in the Garden of Eden illustrates this reality, as they chose to disobey God's command (Genesis 3).

• Determinism: The Bible also teaches that God is omniscient and sovereign over all things, including human actions (Isaiah 46:10, Psalm 139:1-4). God's foreknowledge does not negate human free will but rather demonstrates His perfect knowledge of all that will happen (Romans 8:29, Ephesians 1:4-5).

Both secular philosophical and Biblical perspectives present complex views on the existence of free will and determinism. While there are various philosophical frameworks for understanding these concepts, both secular and religious perspectives acknowledge that the relationship between free will and determinism is a profound and intriguing question that continues to challenge our understanding of reality.

 

[zippy2006]

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

This is your argument, which presupposes incompatibilism:

1. If determinism is true then free will does not exist.
2. Determinism is true.
3. Therefore, free will does not exist.

The problem is that—contrary to what you suppose—you have not provided any reason to believe (2). What almost always happens in laymen's proposals for determinism is that causality is conflated with determinism, and presumably that is what is happening here. The erroneous assumption is, "Causality exists, therefore determinism is true."

 

[Bradskii]

The problem is that—contrary to what you suppose—you have not provided any reason to believe (2).

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.

 

[zippy2006]

If you could give me a personal event that had no cause...

As I already predicted:

What almost always happens in laymen's proposals for determinism is that causality is conflated with determinism, and presumably that is what is happening here. The erroneous assumption is, "Causality exists, therefore determinism is true."

Your assumption is false. A cursory glance at Wikipedia, SEP, or IEP will show you this.

 

[Mark Quayle]

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.

Unless, of course, 'free will' only means ability to choose, and that, according to our own preferences and inclinations, (even if only for that instant of choice). Because that is what we always choose.

But take it a step further, though you hinted at it. Is there any possibility that anything else can happen besides what does happen? Is chaos, unpredictability and probability only OUR assessment —our guess— and 'chance just a placeholder for, "I don't know"'? Empirically, I have to say, only whatever does happen could have happened. At least, I've never seen anything else happen.

Now, if nothing else could have happened, yet something did happen, I'd have to guess that what did happen HAD to happen. Thus, determinism.

 

[Water and Fire]

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.

 

[Bradskii]

As I already predicted:

I did clarify that I was describing causal determinism. That any event is caused by previous conditions. Or to put it another way, no event happens without there being some cause. As per Aquinas (and others). So in that sense the world is determinate. So any decision one makes is determined by previous conditions. Repeat the exact conditions and the event will happen exactly in the same way.

If you think that wouldn't happen, then can you give me an example where it doesn't?

 

[Bradskii]

Is chaos, unpredictability and probability only OUR assessment —our guess— and 'chance just a placeholder for, "I don't know"'?

Bear in mind that unpredictability and indeterminism aren't the same things. Some things (most things) are undoubtedly chaotic and cannot be predicted in any way. But that doesn't mean that they are indeterminate.

 

[Bradskii]

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.

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.

 

[returntosender]

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.

You're turning into hammster, lol

 

[Occams Barber]

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.

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

 

[Maria Billingsley]

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.

"God's will and knowledge of possibilities would be a cause, but then human choices would also be a cause that affects the chain of events. The effect wouldn't be solely determined by God's will, but by the interplay between God's will and the choices humans freely make."

I found this quote quite enlightening.
Blessings.

 

[Bradskii]

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.

I think that's a given. No problem with that.

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.

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

 

[Bradskii]

...and the choices humans freely make."

But what determines our choices?

 

[d taylor]

-​

Beliefs and interest determine our choices and beliefs are determined how we perceive evidence.

 

[Bradskii]

-​

Beliefs and interest determine our choices.

Exactly right.

 

[NBB]

We have free will, but we are not 'powerful enough' so that we could decide all we want. Need to adapt.

 

[Bradskii]

We have free will, but we are not 'powerful enough' so that we could decide all we want. Need to adapt.

Free will isn't determined by whether you get what you want or you don't.

 

[Jonaitis]

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.

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.