# Does free will exist? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 12, 2011, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464 "2011-03-12T23:14:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/61 "2011-03-23T15:24:17Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > Determinism does not mean we’re trains on a set of rails that we can’t break free from. It means we can make decisions within the confines of circumstance and mind-states with predictable effects. That is completely untrue. [Determinism](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism)specifically means that the outcome is completely bound by causality. If the outcome is completely predictable, then you most certainly cannot avoid it. It means that you can’t break free from the tracks. ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/62 "2011-03-23T15:24:45Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > If you deny free will, then you must either (a) blame people for things over which they have no control or (b) refuse to cast blame under any circumstances. This strikes me as decidedly problematic. First, I don’t think that accountability means “blame.” We have punishments for crimes because brains are cause-and-effect machines, and letting a brain know that there will be certain effects of the various options it’s considering is what’s going on with punishment. This all assumes a brain that takes inputs and generates a determined output. If there is free will, then punishment doesn’t seem to make sense (to me). ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/63 "2011-03-23T15:26:03Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > If you deny free will, then you must either (a) blame people for things over which they have no control or (b) refuse to cast blame under any circumstances. This strikes me as decidedly problematic. If there is no free will, then it makes so sense to say that you **must do** anything other than what you do, in fact, do. Whatever you actually do, you did it because you were determined to do so. ---
**Author:** ![Blut\_Aus\_Nord](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blut_Aus_Nord)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/64 "2011-03-23T15:36:23Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > That is completely untrue. [Determinism](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism)specifically means that the outcome is completely bound by causality. If the outcome is completely predictable, then you most certainly cannot avoid it. It means that you can’t break free from the tracks. How do you make a choice? Is it influenced by external circumstances and whatever ratio of certain chemicals are flowing through your brain, with the additional possibility of neurons randomly firing information? If you answered: Yes - This is a combination of determinism and, to a lesser extent, randomness. No - I have no idea. A wizard did it? ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/65 "2011-03-23T16:12:13Z")
> [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](#): > > Determinism does not mean we’re trains on a set of rails that we can’t break free from. It means we can make decisions within the confines of circumstance and mind-states with predictable effects. With determinism, I can predict the effects of a murder, and as such I would never do such a thing. With free will, cause and effect flies out the window, and consequences become random and arbitrary. > > People tend to think free will is the ability to decide something, and by that definition it would exist, but that’s not what the concept really is, strictly speaking. As I understand it, philosophers distinguish between [compatibilist](http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/) and [incompatibilist](http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/incompatibilism-theories/#Rel) views of free will. The compatibilists have a definition of free will that is comptabilbe with determinism. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/66 "2011-03-23T16:15:11Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Free will does not, and cannot exist. What makes it logically incoherent is that something has to cause the will (and the choice is not the will. Those are two different things). The will - the “want to” has to be caused by something. It can’t cause itself (that leads to infinite regress). It’s has to be either random or determined. If it’s determioned, it’s not free. If it’s random, it’s not free. That doesn’t make free will logically incoherent; it just means you can’t reconcile it with the other beliefs you hold. > [@](#): > > “Free will” is a myth. A religious belief. What does it mean to call it a “religious belief” (other than to indicate your scorn of it)? ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/67 "2011-03-23T16:19:53Z")
As I have said before in these kinds of threads, it is obvious to me that we have either free will, or the illusion of free will. Further, I’m not sure how one could distinguish which of these (the actual or the illusory) is truly the case, by means of logic or evidence. Sometimes, I glide through life on autopilot, but there certainly are times when it appears to me as though I have a choice to make, and that, though my choosing may be _influenced_ by various factors, it is not _determined_ before I make it: that it is within my power to choose alternative A or to choose alternative B. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/68 "2011-03-23T16:40:04Z")
> [@CurtC](#): > > If there is free will, then punishment doesn’t seem to make sense (to me). I do not understand this. If there is no free will then punishment would seem to make no sense since you had zero control over what was going to happen. If you have free will then you are able to make choices. That choice includes considering the consequences of your choice. So punishment makes perfect sense. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/69 "2011-03-23T16:45:16Z")
> [@Latro](#): > > You still haven’t explained the Free Will bit here. > Is it the fact that you _can_ choose the $1 ? > > But that would just mean ‘Having a Choice’'. > What choice you actually make is still predetirmined by your past experiences/programming. > > Past experiences might lead someone to suspect that it is some kind of test. That by choosing the $1, he would pass a test others would fail. Your choice is NOT predetermined by your past experience/programming. Certainly it effects it. Past experiences inform us on how to make future decisions. When you are a kid you may stick your finger in a candle flame. Having no previous experience you do not know this is a bad idea. Once you have that experience, upon seeing more candles, you are not likely to stick your finger in the flame because you know the results. You could stick your finger in the flame anyway if you wanted to though. That I can predict you are unlikely to stick your finger in the flame does not preclude you from doing it. I just assign a high probability to you not doing it. Same with the money. I assign a high probability that someone would grab the $100. Doesn’t mean they have to though. > [@](#): > > Past experiences with you, might lead someone to punch you in the face instead of shaking your hand. It occurred to me after I posted that more than a few around here might opt to punch me in the face rather than shake my hand. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Borzo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/43a26b/32.png) [@Borzo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Borzo)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/70 "2011-03-23T16:48:04Z")
I believe this is a reasonable view of “free will”: > **[Compatibilism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism)** > > Compatibilism is the belief that free will and determinism are mutually compatible and that it is possible to believe in both without being logically inconsistent. As Steven Weinberg puts it: "I would say that free will is nothing but our conscious experience of deciding what to do, which I know I am experiencing as I write this review, and this experience is not invalidated by the reflection that physical laws made it inevitable that I would want to make these decisions." The opposing beli Compa... > [@](#): > > Der Trihs didn’t ask you if computers or robots make choices; he asked you if they have free will. If you’re going to stick with defining free will as the ability to make choices, the debate will not be a coherent one since Der Trihs isn’t defining it that way and neither is anyone else (except maybe for typoink). and > [@](#): > > You’re defining “certain kinds of constraints” the way that suits you. Read further. No one, not here or in that article, is defining free will as being free from “mind control”. I’m talking about the freedom to make choices without outside force or control. Maybe someone needs to define what “free” in “free will” actually means? Perhaps there is a misunderstanding. > [@](#): > > But the choice is precisely determined through the way the internal machinery is wired up. The register’s computer’s output is exactly determined by its input: upon being given one barcode, it will display one price, and always the same price; its choice is constrained to one option. It could not display any other price under identical circumstances; hence, the circumstances uniquely determine its choice, and thus, it is not free. It sees a bar code, and it makes a choice when it identifies what that barcode is. It can display any price of any item in it’s database, but it chooses the correct one through internal processing/evaluation. It is free since it is allowed to operate without interferance. If I were to interfere with (ie hack into) it’s internal circuitry so that it under/overcharged, then it would no longer be free. > [@](#): > > If you deny free will, then you must either (a) blame people for things over which they have no control or (b) refuse to cast blame under any circumstances. This strikes me as decidedly problematic. Defining the PURPOSE of blame is extraordinarily important. Do you want to lay blame, so that you can most efficiently make changes to the system for the purposes of improvement? Ted Bundy is dangerous - but was he to blame? This is important, because the purpose of blame, in this case, is to improve our safety. With this purpose in mind, we conclude that he _is_ to blame, and thus we will remove him from society. If it turns out pornography is also to blame, as he claimed, then we should act to regulate pornography. Whether you do or do not believe in free will _is completely irrelevant when it comes to blame._ (edit) > [@](#): > > or past experiences, or instinct, or hunger Are those natural inputs into the system, or are they “hacks”? They are natural, and therefore do not affect free will or the freedom to choose. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/71 "2011-03-23T16:48:54Z")
> [@Borzo](#): > > Does predictability somehow make free will less free? I fail to see why that would be the case. Predictability has nothing to do with it. The will can’t be free because something has to cause it. It doesn’t matter if those causes are predictable or not. The essential point is that the will can’t be self determining. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/72 "2011-03-23T16:52:38Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > If you deny free will, then you must either (a) blame people for things over which they have no control or (b) refuse to cast blame under any circumstances. This strikes me as decidedly problematic. We don’t need to ponder any concept of “blame” in order to impose consequences. Consequences are part of what affects will. ---
**Author:** ![Borzo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/43a26b/32.png) [@Borzo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Borzo)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/73 "2011-03-23T16:54:31Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Predictability has nothing to do with it. The will can’t be free because something has to\*\* cause it\*\*. It doesn’t matter if those causes are predictable or not. The essential point is that the will can’t be self determining. Cause what? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/74 "2011-03-23T16:54:42Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > As I understand it, philosophers distinguish between [compatibilist](http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/) and [incompatibilist](http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/incompatibilism-theories/#Rel) views of free will. The compatibilists have a definition of free will that is comptabilbe with determinism. It’s also not really free will. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/75 "2011-03-23T16:57:52Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > That doesn’t make free will logically incoherent; it just means you can’t reconcile it with the other beliefs you hold. I didn’t express any beliefs. Free will simply can’t be reconciled with _logic_. > [@](#): > > What does it mean to call it a “religious belief” (other than to indicate your scorn of it)? It means that it’s a faith belief. A belief unsupported by evidence. Can you prove that free will exists? If not, then it’s a religious belief. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/76 "2011-03-23T16:59:19Z")
> [@Borzo](#): > > Cause what? Cause the will. “Will” is purely an effect, not a cause. ---
**Author:** ![Borzo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/43a26b/32.png) [@Borzo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Borzo)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/77 "2011-03-23T17:00:12Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I didn’t express any beliefs. Free will simply can’t be reconciled with _logic_. > It means that it’s a faith belief. A belief unsupported by evidence. Can you prove that free will exists? If not, then it’s a religious belief. Explain to me the logic in the suggestion that all beliefs unsupported by evidence are specifically _religious_ in nature. ---
**Author:** ![Borzo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/43a26b/32.png) [@Borzo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Borzo)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/78 "2011-03-23T17:02:53Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Cause the will. “Will” is purely an effect, not a cause. My previous example was a system or “mechanical machinery” that is the mind. This has inputs, and outputs. The will is in the mechanical machinery, and it is free if it is not affected by outside influences, other than the specified inputs. The output is the result of the will. Are you claiming that the output IS the will? More specifically I believe the will is the processing itself, and the machinery itself is “the mind”. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/79 "2011-03-23T17:05:23Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > It means that it’s a faith belief. A belief unsupported by evidence. Can you prove that free will exists? If not, then it’s a religious belief. As I said before, I know of no way of proving, or deciding on the basis of evidence and/or logic, whether free will exists or is an illusion. If I believe in free will, I guess it’s fair to call that a faith belief; butso, I think, would believing that it’s an illusion. Either way, if free will _is_ an illusion, I didn’t choose which to believe; my belief was determined by some prior cause. ---
**Author:** ![Borzo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/43a26b/32.png) [@Borzo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Borzo)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2011, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464/80 "2011-03-23T17:20:43Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Predictability has nothing to do with it. The will can’t be free because something has to cause it. It doesn’t matter if those causes are predictable or not. **The essential point is that the will can’t be self determining.** What does this mean? Does this mean whether or not our actions are “up to us”? Well of course they are. Without the mental machinery in our minds, we wouldn’t get any results. In order to go from inputs to outputs, you need the processing stage in between. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-free-will-exist/574464.md?page=5)