Free Will (7)

Compatibilists believe that determinism, the idea that all events are caused by previous events and cannot be otherwise, is compatible with free will, the belief that individuals have the ability to choose their actions freely. They argue that freedom can be present or absent in a situation for reasons unrelated to metaphysics, and that it can be defined as the ability to act according to one's determined motives without interference from others. In contrast, incompatibilists focus on a concept of "metaphysical free will" that compatibilists claim has never been clearly defined. Some modern compatibilists, such as Harry Frankfurt and Daniel Dennett, argue that free will is the ability to choose to do what constraints allow. Classical compatibilists, such as Thomas Hobbes, believe that free will is present when an individual desires to do an act and is able to do otherwise if they choose. Non-naturalist compatibilism, found in most religions, posits the existence of a soul or mind that is separate from the body and capable of perceiving, thinking, and choosing freely. Some philosophers, such as Ted Honderich, argue that the problem with free will is not determinism or indeterminism, but rather the lack of a satisfactory account of origination. Others, like Sam Harris, argue that free will is an illusion and that thoughts and intentions are caused by factors beyond our control. William James believed in free will on ethical grounds, but did not see evidence for it in science or in his own introspection. He argued that indeterminism is important for the concept of meliorism, the belief

David Hume and Immanuel Kant were two philosophers who approached the concept of free will through the lens of causality. Hume argued that causality was a mental construct used to explain the repeated association of events, and that it was based on weak grounds. Kant, on the other hand, attempted to prove the so-called apriority of causal law, meaning that it precedes all experience and is rooted in the construction of the perceivable world. Schopenhauer also weighed in on the topic, arguing that the perception of objects and qualia through the senses played a role in the concept of causality.

Compatibilism, the belief that free will can exist within a deterministic universe, often asserts that agents are free as a result of their reasoning abilities. Some proponents argue that the interaction between conscious and unconscious brain activity, as well as the influence of agency on the development of a theory of mind, contribute to the concept of free will. Frankfurt's "hierarchical mesh" theory suggests that an individual can have conflicting desires at a first-order level, and also have a desire about those first-order desires at a second-order level, with the effective first-order desire being identified as the will. This will is considered free if it aligns with the individual's second-order desire. Critics argue that conflicts may arise even at higher levels of desire and preference. Some compatibilists, like Dennett, argue that because of chaos and limitations in knowledge, the future is ill-defined for finite beings and that the ability to do "otherwise" only makes sense in relation to expectations. Incompatibilists, on the other hand, argue that free will may be an illusion and that all actions are ultimately controlled by outside forces or random chance. The philosophy of decision theory also grapples with the extent to which an individual's choices can influence the future. Non-naturalist compatibilism, found in many religions, allows for free personal agency based on practical reasons within the laws of physics. Some philosophers, like Honderich, argue that the debate about free will is a verbal issue and that the real problem lies elsewhere. Schopenhauer believes that the will, as an underlying noumenon, is free and not subject to time, space, and causality, but that actions, as phenomena, are subject to these principles and thus necessary. James was ambivalent about free will, believing in it for ethical reasons but not for scientific or introspective ones. Hume approached free will through the concept of causality, arguing that it was a mental construct used to explain the repetition of events and that examining the relation between regularly succeeding events and things that result in other things is necessary. Kant suggested that decision processes with moral implications lie outside the realm of everyday causality and material objects. Freeman's theory of "circular causality" allows for the contribution of self-organizing dynamics and the formation of macroscopic population dynamics that shape the behavior of individuals.

Thomas Aquinas believed that humans have a natural tendency to seek certain goals, but have the freedom to choose between different means of achieving those goals. According to Aquinas, the process of making a choice goes through five stages: considering the desirability of an objective, considering the means of achieving it, forming an intent to pursue it, jointly deciding on the means to achieve it, and finally, executing the chosen action. He argued that free will is an "appetitive power," or a kind of internal inclination, that works in conjunction with reason to make decisions. Some have interpreted Aquinas's view as compatibilist, meaning that free will can exist within a deterministic universe, because God, as the first cause, is able to move voluntary causes (such as human free will) without taking away their voluntariness.

Philosophers have long debated the concept of free will, trying to determine whether it really exists or if it is simply an illusion. Some argue that free will is compatible with determinism, while others believe that it requires indeterminism. Still others argue that the concept of free will is meaningless or that it is not a scientific concept that can be studied. Some have even suggested that the entire debate about free will is nothing more than a "verbal" issue, and that it is simply a matter of language. Despite these different views, the question of free will remains a central and highly debated topic in philosophy.

Buddhism acknowledges both the concept of freedom and determinism, but does not fully subscribe to either. Instead, it preaches a doctrine of "dependent origination," which states that every volition is a result of ignorance and that free will is inherently conditioned. The Buddha rejected the idea of an external agent controlling actions, and instead focused on the interconnectedness of causes and effects. The Buddhist philosophy also emphasizes the importance of moral progress through the capacity for compassionate action. However, it rejects the idea that all happiness and suffering arise from past actions, and instead argues for a theory of "conditionality" rather than strict causality. This approach is in contrast to other ancient Indian philosophies, such as Jainism and Samkhya, which focused more on causality.