View Single Post
Old 08-07-2019, 08:47 AM
Mijin's Avatar
Mijin is online now
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,157
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
There's absolutely nothing in that that conflicts with any version of free will that I'm aware of, except maybe yours.
begbert2, I agreed with everything you've said in this thread, up to this point.

Because "free will" is actually defined in lots of ways, and is the root of the whole problem.

1. Mostly, people just define it in a very vague way that doesn't really mean anything e.g. "Could have chosen differently"

2. But others define it in a self-contradictory way. e.g. Implying that free will cannot be causally connected to the past, but that random events also don't count. So...a reasoned decision that cannot be based on any reasons (which would link it to the past).

3. Then finally of course you have the baggage of religion. Free will is often used as a defence against the problem of evil; God is not culpable in any way will.
This kind of free will is based on the listener being satisfied enough to not bother to think about what free will is, how decisions are made and how it therefore absolves God of responsibility. Any attempt to do so and it falls apart.

From my point of view it is so frustrating, because it will forever be considered as one of the great problems of philosophy. And yet, the whole problem is down to loose or self-contradictory definitions.
Every coherent definition for free will I have seen, free will either trivially does or does not exist, based on the definition, and there is no debate.

Last edited by Mijin; 08-07-2019 at 08:47 AM.