I can argue that free will is an illusion because of both of the reasons stated in the OP.
Why do you choose the cheerios? Because in that moment, you prefer them over the other choices, right? But did you will yourself to prefer them over the raisin bran? No. Not any more than you can will yourself to prefer a bowl of vomit over cheerios. We don’t choose what we like.
Let’s say you decide to eat the cheerios because even though you like the other choices more, the cheerios don’t contain as much sugar and you’re trying to watch your intake. This seems like a “choice”, but it’s not. Because no one chooses to be the type of person who cares about stuff like empty calories. Health conscientiousness is a character trait, like emotional sensitivity and empathy. You can’t make yourself conscientious if you aren’t inclined to be conscientious. You can’t make yourself cry at the end of sad movie if you aren’t already inclined to cry at the end of a sad movie.
Let’s go back to the day when you went to the grocery store and purchased the cereal. If your grocery store shelves only had cheerios, raisin bran, and corn flakes, then you didn’t really do much choosing, did you?
You’re not only limited by the options that are available to you, but you’re also limited by the options you’ve ever been exposed to. If you were raised to think that cereal is the only food appropriate for breakfast, then it will never occur to you to ditch the cheerios and make a fried egg instead. Also, creativity is also a character trait that is outside of our conscious control. A creative person may decide that instead of choosing one type of cereal over the others, he’ll pour a little of each into his bowl and eat the mixture. But if a person isn’t creative enough to come up with this solution, it will simply not occur to him. Thus, a person is severely constrained by what their mind allows them to see. They aren’t free to do anything.
so why put criminals in jail if there is no free will? i guess to prevent them form doing harm, right? i mean, they are not morally at fault if they have no free will, are they?
Well, many “free will is an illusion” folks do believe the current criminal justice system needs to be reevaluated. Throw away the key for people who show signs of re-offending, and focus on education and support services for those who just got caught up in the game.
But punishment is useful even if free will is an illusion. We yell at toddlers and puppies when they do wrong not because we necessarily want to punish them, but because this is how you deter them (that is, their brains) from doing wrong again. And it works, in moderation.
Assembling data and making choices isn’t what most people mean by free will. Insects can do that. Some computer programs can too. Free will is usually some ephemeral quality only humans have, or humans and a couple higher mammals (like consciousness).
The standard argument against free will is that either: 1. our actions are caused by prior events and our brains are mechanical devices following heuristics so we don’t will anything beyond our biology, or 2. our actions are caused by indeterminate randomness, in which case they weren’t freely chosen either.
It’s not so much which cereal you pick, but whether you could have picked otherwise given the same conditions.
Did you choose to learn how to read? Or did factors beyond your control (your attention span, your willingness to please, the effectiveness of your teachers, your homelife) work in concert to produce someone who is literate?
To go back to your cereal example, if I choose cheerios and society deems this the “wrong” choice to make, I can be subjected to enough aversion therapy to “convince” me to go with the raisin bran. I may not actually like raisin bran, but my brain can be trained to associate cheerios with so much negativity that it’s not worth it. Or, I can be taught how to make pancakes so that I don’t have to eat cereal. Or, I can be taught how to maximize my creativity to come up with novel solutions for mundane problems. If I’m not inclined to learn, then none of this will work. But if I’m open-minded, then it just might. And “free will” will have no role to play in any of it.
As far as I know, my computer doesn’t “like” anything. It does what it does because there’s a code written somewhere telling it to do it. A human, on the other hand, can like one thing one moment and not like it another moment, for no apparent reason. And a human can also do something that it doesn’t want to do if he or she is afraid of what will happen otherwise. I’m not a programmer, but I don’t think computers do this routinely.
Fundamentally, though, I think humans are not that different from computers. We’re just a lot more complex
a) true ‘free will’ can only come when there is no conscious thought regarding the outcome of any specific action - when it no longer is a ‘choice’ but just an ‘action’.
Thing is - in this case - you can’t really call it ‘free will’ if there is no thought process involved - but it is certainly the most ‘freeing’ from any kind of control.
(The lion does not care about the gazelles feelings in the matter, nor of anyone elses opinion on its diet - it only ‘cares’ insomuch as it can about being ‘hungry’.)
b) as soon as potential outcomes are part of the decision making process - those actions have less ‘free will’ - but the very fact that we ‘can’ choose counter to a ‘good choice’ is what says we have the most ‘free will’.
(I know if I get caught speeding, there will be a penalty, yet I choose to speed anyway).
Its the ‘will’ component - that ability to choose counter to all the available data/repercussions - that says we have ‘it’.
Do you choose what you like? Or do you just like what you like.
I don’t know why I like corn chips. I just do. It’s not like I woke up one morning and told myself I would learn to like them, transforming myself into a Frito-lover. I guess you can say I was born into the world with this preference. If this is the case, then you can neither fault me or praise me for this particular trait. Because I didn’t “will” it to happen.
I don’t believe in a predetermined universe, but I don’t believe in free will. For me to say that I possess free will, I’m essentially saying that I am capable of doing things that I don’t feel compelled to do. And I can’t say this. I am compelled to do everything I do, whether it be to eat because I feel hungry, shower because I dislike my BO, or go to work because I want money. Take away my motivations and I simply will not move. I know this about myself. So this alone is why I don’t believe in free will. But this doesn’t require me to believe that everything was predetermined at the moment of the Big Bang.
i’m not health conscious. but i don’t like being fat. abstaining from corn chips is a choice i make. i’m violating your rules already. i have NO inclination to be health conscious. left to my inclinations, i’d eat corn chips until the day i die.
You like corn chips but you dislike being fat even more. Just as you don’t choose whether corn chips are pleasing to you, you don’t choose your personal aversion to fat and obesity. So you aren’t willing anything. “Will” implies volition. Which I assert you do not have when it comes to the matter of preferences and desires.
I don’t mind arguing, but it’s like you’re not understanding what I’ve been saying to you over the past hour.