Why free will triumphs over determinism (or why Neo prevailed)

[greybeta]

Recently, I made the mistake of commenting on the age-old debate of free will versus determinism on a friend’s Facebook note the other day. I should know well enough to leave well enough alone, but I just couldn’t help myself. You see, this friend posted a series of lengthy forum posts on why we lack free will. I couldn’t help but be annoyed by the fallacious logic used to promote determinism.

Deterministic View
Point 1: God is all-knowing.
Sub Point 1: God knows everything that's going to happen.
Sub Point 2: God is always right.

Conclusion: Everything has to happen the way God knows it will, or God would be wrong.
If God is all-powerful, then he could have made the world in any way he chose. Assuming God is all-knowing, this means that God knew the outcomes of each kind of world that he would build.

This means that God decided what we would do before he made the world (this jives with what Christians say; God has a plan, right?). He chose this exact path of history, down to what shirt you wore yesterday. If that's true, then there is no way that we can have free will. God already chose everything for us.

Free Will View
God granted us the right to make our choices in life.

D2’s View
There are many ways to resolve free will versus determinism. Someone came up with the idea of “soft” determinism, for example, to try to make the two ideas compatible. But that is not the interesting case. No, the interesting cases are where one idea directly opposes the other.

Here’s an example I’ve heard. Say you roll a dice. You know the outcome must be an integer value ranging from one to six. Does knowing all those outcomes prevent you from throwing the dice?

Perhaps you’ve watched the Matrix trilogy. If you haven’t, allow me to spoil the following exchange for you.

Free Will vs. Determinism

Agent Smith: Why, Mr. Anderson? Why do you do it? Why get up? Why keep fighting? Do you believe you're fighting for something? For more than your survival? Can you tell me what it is? Do you even know? Is it freedom? Or truth? Perhaps peace? Yes? No? Could it be for love? Illusions, Mr. Anderson. Vagaries of perception. The temporary constructs of a feeble human intellect trying desperately to justify an existence that is without meaning or purpose. And all of them as artificial as the Matrix itself, although only a human mind could invent something as insipid as love. You must be able to see it, Mr. Anderson. You must know it by now. You can't win. It's pointless to keep fighting. Why, Mr. Anderson? Why? Why do you persist?
Neo: Because I choose to.

Of course, a determinist might argue that we’re merely programmed to believe we have free will. Alright, how about a Buddhist koan?

One day, a student of Shunryu Suzuki-Roshi confronted him at Sokoji, in his office, and said, “If you believe in freedom why do you keep your bird locked up in a cage?” Suzuki Roshi went over and opened the door of the cage and the bird flew out of the cage and out of the window. It is said that then Shunryu Suzuki turned to the student and said “That bird is free – you owe me a bird.”

Also, look at our legal system. Our legal system is predicated on the theory that we have free will. We punish people for making poor choices. After all, if that weren’t the case, we shouldn’t charge anyone with a crime because they were meant to do it. Oh, I know, we’re meant to punish those that were meant to commit those crimes.

All that being said, if determinism works for you, then more power to you. However, I’m determined to believe that free will triumphs over determinism. You’re always free to disagree.

Maktub. It is written.

Comments

[nuala.livejournal.com]

The first 2 assume God exists.* Free will is free will, regardless of deity involvement. (There's my argument. :D )

* My beliefs are utterly irrelevant here, regardless of whether or not I believe in God/something spiritual/etc.

[greybeta.livejournal.com]

Indeed. Most philosophical discussions include God because that is a concept that is readily understood by most people.

[moocowrich.livejournal.com]

I don't believe that's true at all. There are several versions of determinism, and I doubt very much that many philosophers would include God in the strongest formulation of the argument. The argument you gave is simply weaker than the argument that everything that happens is caused by antecedent conditions, and that if any person knew everything about the universe one second, he would be able to predict everything that happens in the next second.

Then again, maybe you're using the word "philosophical" in a different way than I would -- and I think this is the case, especially since academic philosophy cares little for being readily understood by most people.

[greybeta.livejournal.com]

The argument you gave is simply weaker than the argument that everything that happens is caused by antecedent conditions, and that if any person knew everything about the universe one second, he would be able to predict everything that happens in the next second.
But how are you going to resolve things like the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle? Uncertainity is part of the universe, which would seem to throw off a deterministic worldview. In other words, knowing everything would mean that you would know that you would not know everything.

Then again, maybe you're using the word "philosophical" in a different way than I would -- and I think this is the case, especially since academic philosophy cares little for being readily understood by most people.
When I say "philosophical" here, I mean when the majority of people discuss these things. I don't count academia here, since most people care little for understanding esoteric tomes. =)

[tammy-moore.livejournal.com]

I am uncomfortable with the idea of the determinist God, simply because if God really does exactly what everyone is going to do then a: his constant stream of injunctions he knows people are going to disobey is a bit passive-aggressive and b: his fire and brimstone reaction to that disobedience is a bit sadistic.

(My RE teacher claimed that we had free will but that God could still tell WHAT we were going to do. He was Pooh on the bridge and he could see how the currents of time would influence the little pooh-stick humans. I argue that in that case the God couldn't interfere in mankind's affairs since by immersing himself in the timestream he'd affect and be affected by it in ways he couldn't predict. Then he brought up Faith. He always fell back on Faith.)

[greybeta.livejournal.com]

The good Lord works in mysterious ways. =)

[thanoslug.livejournal.com]

I'm a firm believer in free will and, as you know, a somewhat fundamentalist, conservative christian. I believe that God created us with free will. Determinism is basically another word for the religious idea of predestination. I believe that God has foreknowledge of how events are going to play themselves out but that foreknowledge does not equal predestination or determinism. God did not lay out how things were going to happen, He did not predetermine the outcomes.

Just because I have foreknowledge that if my child puts their hand on a hot stove that they will be burned does not mean that, when it happens, I caused it. It happened because my child chose to put their hand their of their own free will. I see God's foreknowledge as similar to that but on a, of course, much larger scale. I believe that God knows the general path that events are going to take. That due to His omniscience and omnipotence He can predict how events will unfold. These events will unfold in this way regardless of whether Bob does a thing or, alternately if Bob doesn't do it, then Joe does it instead. I could be completely off base here but fortunately for me understanding how God works is not a prerequisite for salvation.

We bear the responsibility for the choices that we make and God crafts His plans for our world such that His purposes are served regardless of what choices we might make. His foreknowledge allows Him to guide events and work them to His purpose without impinging upon our free will. Of course, once one becomes a Christian one voluntarily gives up a portion of that free will in order to become a servant of Christ.

[greybeta.livejournal.com]

I've heard it said that disciples freely choose to make God the center of their life.

[cynicalcleric.livejournal.com]

Ultimately, does the answer matter?

[fax-celestis.livejournal.com]

Yes. One answer makes me depressed, but that's the answer that says I'm supposed to be depressed because it was predetermined to be so.

[greybeta.livejournal.com]

It depends on who you ask!

[jacobford.livejournal.com]

Your argument has a central flaw: you assume (erroneously, of course) that The Matrix had (a) sequel(s).

Also, your summary of the deterministic view got me thinking about soft determinism again, which I believe can be interpreted as this:

Soft Deterministic View
Point 1: God is all-knowing.
Sub Point 1: God knows everything that's going to happen, including everything that can--but doesn't--happen.
Sub Point 2: God is always right because God sees all possibilities.

Just a thought.

[jacobford.livejournal.com]

Wait, that sounds like free will, doesn't it? Crap!

[greybeta.livejournal.com]

You said it! =P

[kisekileia.livejournal.com]

I don't believe we have anything close to complete free will, because we're affected by biological, psychological, and social forces beyond our control. But I don't really believe everything is predetermined, either.

[greybeta.livejournal.com]

It's the middle of the road for you! =)

[fluffworld.livejournal.com]

This is one of the areas where I find being an atheist useful. That said, I'm used to hearing determinism argued from a biological, social and chemical basis as opposed to from God. And I still think it's lazy thinking for pessimists with a superiority complex.

[greybeta.livejournal.com]

Hang around awhile, you'll find out that I prefer to use a general sense of God in my arguments. =)

[esper3k.livejournal.com]

For me, I'd like to believe that free will exists, but I truly do believe that if everything was to be known (and that it is possible to do so), then everything is predictable and there is no free will.

You may believe that you are making a choice and that you could've chosen something other than the outcome, but in reality, there was no way you could've done anything other than what you did.

In the God example, if God truly knows everything, that includes every aspect including the future and every turn, collision, etc. that every particle makes. If you have a God that only knows some things, then he doesn't really know everything.

Likewise with the d6 example. You may know that the outcome will be an integer from 1-6. Heck, you might even know exactly what number is going to turn up. However, if you throw the dice, it isn't because you chose to, but it's because events happened such that you were going to (and did).

It's tough to argue around it, in my opinion, and realistically, it doesn't have much impact on my life. I continue living on day to day as normal. Regardless of determinism is correct or not, I can't perceive the all events that affect what I'm going to do, so I don't let it worry me.

[greybeta.livejournal.com]

The counterargument would be thus: What if there were infinite possibilities? Determinism requires finite possibilities, because otherwise it would be impossible to predict actions otherwise.

The gist of the debate is whether all things are knowable. Those who favor free will often say that not all things are knowable, or if they are then only God can know them. Those who favor determinism often say that all things may not be knowable but if we did know them we would be able to predict all outcomes.

To me, free will is simpler and makes more sense.

[esper3k.livejournal.com]

But the thing is, with determinism, there aren't infinite possibilities. There only is what previously/currently exists and what will happen.

Just because we can't predict something doesn't mean that it's not predictable.

Even if only God knows everything, by knowing everything, that prevents the existence of free will. It's not possible to have something that truly knows everything and have free will together.

You're more than welcome to your opinion on this. I just don't see free will as being any simpler or making more sense. We live in a world of cause & effect. Why would it make more sense to deny applying those rules to ourselves? :)

[greybeta.livejournal.com]

God knowing everything doesn't necessarily prevent the existence of free will. Us knowing everything would prevent the existence of free will.

[esper3k.livejournal.com]

Why not?

If God (or anything) truly knows everything then no matter what you "choose", what occurs will not deviate from what is known, otherwise the entity would not truly know everything.

If you cannot affect the outcome, then you don't truly have free will.

[greybeta.livejournal.com]

I don't see God's omniscience and our free will as being mutually exclusive. God knows the possibilities of all of our actions, but that doesn't mean we don't have free will. And just because we cannot affect all outcomes doesn't mean we lack free will.

To take a previous example, say we're asked to predict the result of a d6 roll. We've got approximately a 16.6% chance of getting it right. We would say God would get it 100% right. We would also say God would know what we would pick 100% of the time. So we're locked into whatever we choose because of previous factors.

Determinism wins, right? But I would argue that free will wins here. It has to do with a point that neither determinism nor free will can concede ground on. I'll leave it at that. =)

[esper3k.livejournal.com]

Yeah for me, if a being is truly all knowing, there are no possibilities - only what is going to happen.

I think a lot of it depends on people's definition of free will.

For me, if there has to be an actual choice possible. Meaning that there has to actually be multiple possiblities being true. If something truly knows everything, then there really isn't a possibility of any deviation.

It's a discussion that I agree that it will be hard to convince people of either side on :)