Free Will - Illusion or Reality?

An exploration of the philosophical question "Does Free Will exist or is it an illusion?" based on historical philosophical positions, modern science and logical deduction.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• free
• will
• libertarianism
• phliosophy

[followingtheplanets]

Is this a joke? Are you debating if I freely typed this comment to this video?

[samayoa95]

Now conservatives have an excuse to let global warming and human suffering continue. Their "free will" to let it continue has already been determined!

[mattboy88]

The free will absolutely exists, but you need to learn how to use it. Step 1: be conscious you can choose. Step 2: everything else shall follow.

[dartplayer170]

The sentence is indeed ambiguous. It is the potential for multiple outcomes which is important. But this potential must exist prior to the begining of the chain of thought. Perception is a word used to describe that. Maybe it is not the correct word. But if you were to actually have any respect for other people's thoughts, you may actually start by assuming that the definition is meaningfull rather than stupid. By the way, that is ad hominem, stating that I need your help!

[dartplayer170]

Determinism is a part of every rational discussion of free will. This is the result of both free will and determinism being intuitively true but incongruent with each other. Why attack me for this when every book on the subject matter uses this concept? Do you think that you are right and every other intellectual has been wrong? I am not disagreeing that animals do not have free will but there is no way to even fid out if animals experience free will so why go there?

[dartplayer170]

Its entirely different. Colour of snow is a property of snow. You cannot define something that it is clearly there to be something else. You can name it. Free will is a concept which is defined by man to describe an experience that we have. I've tried to define it as best that I can. Sorry if you do not agree with it.

[unseenstrings]

I said, "You can define the color of snow to be the same color as blood."

You replied, "No you can't"

Whereas, in fact you've given a definition of free will that is not used or understood by the average person. You've given something another definition. Do you understand my point? Well, no matter. I give up.

[unseenstrings]

So you have now idea of what you are saying then. Well, that makes two of us that have no idea of what you are talking about:

You defined free will as "Conscious control to make choices which creates the potential for multiple future outcomes as percirved prior to the beginning of the conscious thought mechanism."

Again I ask, "How can you perceive something prior to conscious thought?"

This is my last comment by the way. I don't seem to be able to help you overcome your confusion. Sorry.

[unseenstrings]

"I don' tink that you realize that disprooving determinism does not in fact proove free will"

Of course it doesn't. And the subject was free will. So why was determinism even brought up when it could only confuse the issue at hand? And yes, one can jump to the conclusion that what is true for the human mammals is true for the nonhuman. Who is the say that we have souls that go up and nonhumans merely rot and go back to the elements? We both have blood in our veins and breathe the same air.

[dartplayer170]

I don' tink that you realize that disprooving determinism does not in fact proove free will. So, one cannot jump to the conclusion that the same thing applies to free will for other living things.