does "free will" actually exist?

[yepimonfire]

do we really have the ability to make choices independently of a situation (hopefully that makes sense) or are we just some sort of machine constantly reacting to stimulus that learns "how" to react based on past experiences?

[Siz]

do we really have the ability to make choices independently of a situation
or
are we just some sort of machine constantly reacting to stimulus that learns "how" to react based on past experiences?

I would judge both of the two ideas stated above to be correct. The latter is applicable only if we allow ourselves to default to a non free-thinking position.

As for the existence of free-will, well that depends on whether you consider self-imposed limitations on ones expression of desires to be insurmountable. The debate between determinism and libertarianism still rages...

[Too Few Lions]

yeah, I would have thought that it's a mixture of the two, partly dependent on how our brains are wired and how capable we are of 'thinking outside of the box' and considering all possible responses to a given situation.

[OldGit]

All I can work out is that society has to assume that people have free will, otherwise it can't judge them.  As to the question - maybe it isn't answerable in terms of what really goes on in the brain.

[xSilverPhinx]

I have no idea, but I think we may have limited or restricted will.

Assuming we don't really know, the least we can say is that we have the illusion of free will, because we're not conscious of the processes that lead to some decisions, if not all.

Maybe there is a difference in the weight people give to different information when making a choice, but the outcome can also be rather predictable based on how much the person knows, instinctual behaviour (reptilian brain, mostly) and the situation they're in.

I tend to lean more towards determinism than not.

[DeterminedJuliet]

I've never really understood the "question" of free will. Or, rather, how anyone could have a completely deterministic point of view.

I mean, if I'm "destined" to be a rocket scientist, does that mean that I can drop out of highschool and just coast along in life because it's bound to happen anyways? Obviously our choices have weight and impact our lives. Everyone makes choices, so I get confused when people start arguing about this kind of thing.  ???

[Pharaoh Cat]

do we really have the ability to make choices independently of a situation (hopefully that makes sense) or are we just some sort of machine constantly reacting to stimulus that learns "how" to react based on past experiences?

I am a hard determinist.  Given perfect knowledge of the present, the future could be predicted perfectly.  Only our imperfect knowledge of the present renders our predictions of the future more or less unreliable.  Heisenberg's uncertainty principle says merely that our knowledge of the present with regard to the sub-atomic realms will inevitably be imperfect.  It doesn't say the sub-atomic future is undetermined.  It merely says, whether or not the sub-atomic future is determined, we won't know in what direction it is destined to go, or if we know in what direction, we won't know how fast.  The Heisenberg uncertainty principle is agnostic toward determinism.

If you were omniscient with regard to my genetic composition, omniscient with regard to the phenotypic and psychodynamic ramifications, and omniscient with regard to my every experience from conception to this moment, you would know precisely what I was going to do next.  You could produce this very post I'm now typing, verbatim, simultaneous with my own typing of it.  On what do I base this?  Causality, which as far as I can tell is ubiquitous.  Nothing happens except as the result of something else happening prior, and if A caused B yesterday, then all else being equal, A will cause B today.

The above has no bearing on our ability to impose law on ourselves.  If we want people to leave other people's property alone, we make a law to that effect, and if we want people to comply with that law, we associate penalties with non-compliance.  Law isn't morality.  Law is leverage.  Law is behavior-modification by way of threat, imposed so as to preserve a status quo desired by the lawmakers or their bosses or constituents.  It isn't at all necessary for us to pass moral judgment on the lawbreaker.  We condemn and punish so as to deter, and we deter so as to preserve a status quo to our liking.

[Stevil]

No such thing as free will.
We do make choices but they are based on many things, physical makeup, upbringing, culture, teachings, dietary intake.

If you could create the exact same conditions, likely the same decision would be made.

Free will supposes a soul detached from all of the physicality but somehow floating around, following a particular life system. It would suggest that a different soul within the same life system, same situation, would make different choices, because that soul is more good or more bad than other souls hence it is likely to make the wrong or right choice and then god will judge it.

1. I have no belief in gods
2. I have no belief in morality (good, bad)
3. I have no belief in soul
4. I have no belief in free will

[Pharaoh Cat]

If you could create the exact same conditions, likely the same decision would be made.

Definitely the same decision would be made.

Free will supposes a soul detached from all of the physicality but somehow floating around, following a particular life system. It would suggest that a different soul within the same life system, same situation, would make different choices, because that soul is more good or more bad than other souls hence it is likely to make the wrong or right choice and then god will judge it.

Even if I knew unequivocally that I had a soul, I would still be a hard determinist, since causality would still apply.

Aristotle posited four elements to causality: (1) a thing's nature; (2) a thing's structure; (3) a thing's history, including what just happened a moment ago; and (4) any plan imposed on the universe by its maker, if maker there be.  You and I would dispense with the fourth.  As for the second, let's grant for simplicity's sake that a soul lacks structure.  The first and third element would still remain.  A soul would have some sort of nature, and some sort of history, together comprising the causality impressing upon the soul's decision-making apparatus.  Not even souls can escape causality.

[Asmodean]

I guess in many cases, the correct definition of "free will" hinges on how absolute a freedom you put into the word "free".

[Ecurb Noselrub]

The one thing that may alter a completely deterministic world view is intelligent self-consciousness and self-reflection, which humans alone possess on this planet, it appears.  Once one begins to contemplate one's own actions through reflective thought, one is presented with a variety of options that creatures ruled by instinct do not have.  The mere act of considering all the alternatives presented by a situation interferes with the process of strict determinism.  One may decide to resist normal impulses to act and thoughtfully consider other choices. This process itself becomes part of the causal chain, and creates a feedback loop that influences the ultimate outcome. While deterministic forces may still apply within the feedback loop, the whole process of stopping the normal course of cause/effect to thoughtfully reflect has introduced a previously unknown factor into the equation. In this manner, humans do have some capacity by their wills to alter outcomes.  I wouldn't call it entirely "free" will, but neither is it slavish determinism.

[Stevil]

While deterministic forces may still apply within the feedback loop, the whole process of stopping the normal course of cause/effect to thoughtfully reflect has introduced a previously unknown factor into the equation. In this manner, humans do have some capacity by their wills to alter outcomes.  I wouldn't call it entirely "free" will, but neither is it slavish determinism.

I am not quite following you.
Alter the outcome?
Doesn't your god already know what will happen? Nothing has been altered.
What is this seemingly random facter that does not follow cause/effect? Do our brains have a random generator, or do we use past events to make decisions hence altering the future?  Sounds alot like cause and effect.

[Asmodean]

I'm a crappy determinist, however, it often does seem that the future is pre-determined in hindsight, if you know what I mean.

(In case you don't, I do not think an event is pre-determined before it occurs, but after it occurs, one can usually dig up a bunch of contributing factors, given the lack of life, getting laid or anything at all better to do)

[Ecurb Noselrub]

While deterministic forces may still apply within the feedback loop, the whole process of stopping the normal course of cause/effect to thoughtfully reflect has introduced a previously unknown factor into the equation. In this manner, humans do have some capacity by their wills to alter outcomes.  I wouldn't call it entirely "free" will, but neither is it slavish determinism.

I am not quite following you.
Alter the outcome?
Doesn't your god already know what will happen? Nothing has been altered.
What is this seemingly random facter that does not follow cause/effect? Do our brains have a random generator, or do we use past events to make decisions hence altering the future?  Sounds alot like cause and effect.

First, I didn't mention anything about God. But since you brought him up, my view of God is that, while he knows a lot, he doesn't know literally everything that will happen.  That is one consequence of the creation of creatures with intelligence.  Second, yes, we use past events to make decisions. But because of our capacity to reflect and consider, two separate brains may view past events in different ways, and thus decide to arrive at different conclusions based on the same input.  Or, they may decide to act capriciously in a way that is impossible, even for God, to predict.  Human brains alter the processes of determinism, IMHO. Of course, this alteration is only within  relatively small parameters.  There are many things that we cannot change.

[Pharaoh Cat]

I guess in many cases, the correct definition of "free will" hinges on how absolute a freedom you put into the word "free".

Yes, I agree.  If, for example, "free will" means there's no spirit in the sky pulling my strings like a puppeteer, then mark me down as a free will proponent.  But if "free will" means my decisions are independent of my genes and my history, then mark me down as a determinist.