So I dont believe in free will ,through a combination of experience and events in my life(most to do with leaving religion) however like most, I recognise the need for the concept of free will, as artificial as it may be
But where to draw the line. Obviously, even for people that believe in free will, where they draw there line is different among each other e.g across cultures, generation and among individual, but what do you do when you know that line is just artificial.
For example, alots people say that trauma doesn’t excuses abuse, only contextualise, it but if you have statical evidence that a large or even most of abusers have been abused/been through a traumatic event that is by defined an excuse.
Did you really just ask me for YOUR opinion on a topic?
So you like the hidden variables versions of quantum mechanics?
I like prefer many worlds which doesn’t really jive with this.
Even if you believe in many worlds that are created by quantum events, you don’t have to think that those events are influenced by or have anything to do with free will
I like the branch you experience is shaped by free will one. Probably not correct but it’s fun
I dont think that existence of true randomness is prove that free will exist. Maybe it proves that the world isn’t just made up of cause and effect, but there is no reason to think that the human brain works like that.
I believe in free will. To me it is expressed in that given the same circumstances different individuals will behave differently. Now you can get into everything about that individual that leads to the decisions they make like genetics and experience but to me its a bit chicken and egg in that you are descibing who the individual is. I think that up to the point a decision is made it could be made in any way. Maybe much more likely to be one ove another but individuals make decisions that they themselves would never have prediced they would make. I believe the univers is created by decisions that constantly happen. The present actuating a new present from possible futures. This is why morally I think we define ourselves by our choices. We are what we chose to be every second of every day. We cab massively change who we are with our choices but it won’t remove the previous choices and that change will be limited by that.
There is one of those motivational stories that goes something like this:
two twin brothers that grew up together with the same upbringing, have lead vastly different lives, one become a wife beater and acholoic with no job like his father and another become a successful man. Its meant to show that people can choose their future despite where they came from.
But, the difference between the twins had to have been caused by something, otherwise there is no free will, but if it was caused by something, then it was something outside their control, and your back at square one.
Free will is a paradoxical concept, it necessities that there is some mysterious force inside people’s mind that we can never see or explain that guides their decisions, that is influence but directly effect by the environment.
individuals make decisions that they themselves would never have prediced they would make
Most of my decisions I never predicted even with my current believe. But I can explain and see where most of my actions came from.
Not being able to see the future 100% isn’t prove that free will exist. I have been baffled some of choice of people around, sometimes for good and sometimes for bad.
A person has no more free will than a rock because both are governed by the most important rule of the universe, cause and effect.
Of course none of this is important really, like I said I still go through like there is still is free will. It just all interesting to think about
see to me this is conflating free will with being. You made your decision because of who you are. You got chocalate ice cream because you like chocolate ice cream. You stay out of the sun because your fair skinned. Sometimes though people feel like a change and don’t choose their favorite and want to try something or are to engaged with something and get a sunburn. Its basically saying because choices made are influenced by who you are you have no free will. I sometimes use the term effective free will but honestly to me its kinda a back and forth. The person you are come from the decisions you make and decisions you make are influneced by the person you are. Everyone has experiences with decisions that could have went the other way. To me the fact we make the decisions is free will. Even if there are reasons and events behind them. We made the choice and the choice could have been different.
First off you don’t have statistical evidence since you also have to compare it to the number of people who were abused and haven’t abused anyone. The fact that you’re a statistic is probably because you were reported as being abusive. The reason why it seems deterministic is because non-abuse isn’t something that people report. The key word is “believe” which means you can believe whatever you want, actual experience is less malleable than belief.
I believe in causal determinism and personally I still believe in free will, because in a hypothetically undetermined existence where we have this magic power to make a decision, it makes an impact whether or not I believe in it. In a determined existence whether I’m aware of it or not doesn’t matter as it’s already determined.
When it comes to laws, ethics and judgements, I don’t think there is a clear solution, since all of this is built on the idea of free will and specifically accountability. We have this weird line, because only with time we took some levels of determinism into account for judging an action, e.g. psychological determinism.
I’m not sure where my line is. I guess in practice it makes sense that we can only consider determining causes where we can describe the events that lead to the action in detail (that too is vague and contextual). E.g. Tourette causing someone to say the n-word is more direct, clear and definitive than a traumatic event leading to abuse. Then again, it also means my lack of (specific) information in the chain of causation decides how I view someone.
