Stop Saying You Don't Have Free Will #philosophy #freewill #determinism #physics #science

A short rebuke of determinism.

🔴 Watch My Free Webinar Link in Bio

[sigigle]

This is just the common trick of redefining of freewill to just mean will.
"You are free to do only what you were always inevitably going to do" - is not what most people mean by freewill.

[sikarasmahasawin]

You just redefined the terms argument and made it solely semantic argument which neither deny or affirm the original point you referred to.

[gingerbreadman]

YESSSS! It always feels like such a goalposting game trying to talk about free will, this is a really good explanation

[catatoni]

I used to be an atheist
But after I learned that most atheists dont believe in free will, I started to actually think about my beliefs
I'm agnostic now

[highlightrelz]

The question is why do you like chocolate? Why do you choose the things you do? That’s the interesting question

[XanEli]

I define free will as basically the ability to do other than what was done in at least some situations

[arbour-concepts]

I think Henri Bergson has a much better argument for free will via a non-determinist conception of time. I recommend reading “time and free will” if you haven’t already.

[darshangoswami]

What if we define free will as "The ability to have acted differently"? Genuine question.

[henryp.]

This subject is really done for me but people keep making same tired old arguments. Understand there is no such thing as 'Free Will' it is a misnomer & an oxymoron.

There is no such thing as a 'Free', what does free even mean here? Free from reason, logic? free from causality? free to get the wrong answer? Free to believe 2+2 = 3?

the FACT is we have a confined will, and you want a 'always get the right answer' WILL, you want a Will, not a Wrong Will.

now as Brian Greene has contributed to the discussion, unlike ants which are confined to a much smaller box and can only select from their very limited repertoire of options, we have much less confinement in that sense. But we're 'still confined' to end up where we do, with no choice in deciding who we become.

to quote inmendham - _'Your Brain MADE YOU, you didn't make your brain."_

A true all powerful benevolent omniscient Being wouldn't have 'free will' they are confined by knowing 2 + 2 = 4, they aren't free to believe it equals 73, nor would they be free to believe torture doesn't matter and it's fine to impose it. Knowledge confines you. I want a confined correct will, not a 'free will'.

Watch an inmendham video on the subject.

[piedpiper]

I think the point is moreso that if I ask:

"Think of an animal!"

How much choice did you have in deciding what image your mind conjured up?

What agency existed when i thought about a whale?

It feels more accurate to say that the thought was impregnated into me.

[hartyewh]

You are free to be and do whatever that it is you are and do. You can't randomly be someone else. Obviously.

[philosophicsblog]

This asserts undue powers of reason, biasing reason over lower-level causes that are later rationalised and then articulated as 'reasons' ex post facto.

[bleepbloop]

This argument doesn't interact with the argument people who say we don't have free will are making. You're just using a different definition to skirt past the real argument, which is that if the desires themselves are ultimately dictated by causality, your choices are not meaningfully "free."

It is helpful to distinguish between volitional and non-volitional actions. It is not helpful to dodge the question of free will be conflating it with volitionality.

[GraysonHawk]

I watched this twice but I still don’t understand why, if my decisions are the result of purely causal interactions of molecules, how can I have a freewill? It still doesn’t make sense to me

[edmunddengler]

Free will means having a multiple choices and that you make a choice. A brick doesn't have free will with regard to gravity. You have lots of choice as to what ice cream you eat. Birds and worms have free will.

[stevenwolfe]

There seems to be a lot of debate about choices being biased because of prior conditions. So choosing chocolate ice cream is done because you like chocolate, might be self determination, but isn't free will. However, I think some choices are free from bias, such as calling "heads or tails" on a fair coin. Assuming you haven't rationalized a strategy ("I will always go heads"), such a choice is made as randomly as the coin flip itself. Thus that would mean you made a choice free from prior conditions and are capable of free will.

[okiedokie]

Yeah, I know I have reason and I am the one who has constructed them but they were completely determined by prior causes. Compatibilists just wanna argue for nothing.

[v.a.n.e.]

the will can only be determined or random. what is the third option?

[metasoul]

I agree that causality and free will are compatible, but for different, wacky, phenomenological reasons.

To me, it seems that experience is inextricably linked to choice. Every human being that has ever lived has made choices, and no human being will ever be able to successfully divorce themselves from their own agency. I understand this as an axiom until somebody can prove me wrong. The feeling of choice is just as inescapable as the logic behind causality. And so my post modern ass has no choice but to believe in both.

[cloudoftime]

This relies upon particular definitions of "you" and "free." The particularization is one issue here. I am experiencing no force of compulsion causing me to accept your definitions.