4 ms·

My will is free if, from my vantage point and current knowledge, I reasonably believe I am making a choice between multiple valid options. Anything else by def

by ethbro 8y ago

My will is free if, from my vantage point and current knowledge, I reasonably believe I am making a choice between multiple valid options. Anything else by definition requires omniscience on the part of the exerciser.

rohit2412 8y ago
So, if I force someone into a work camp and have them dig for 23 years, or put a gun on their head and have them dig for 23 years, or scared them about eternal damnation and have them dig for 23 years? All these cases are free will?
- IncRnd 8y ago
  Of course. You are presenting a false dichotomy. By its very definition, each of those acts engages one's free will. People have escaped from work camps or revolted. Others have resisted armed attackers. Some have used their god-given intelligence to question other's interpretations of scriptures. and so on...
  - thatcat 8y ago
    I don't think resisting armed attackers is technically an act of free will, as it seems quite costly.
    - harperlee 8y ago
      It is an act of free will among 2 options, the risky but valuable and the safe but miserable. The "poor" you end up is not a lack of ability to choose - just that you start from a shitty place.
      - thatcat 8y ago
        My apologies, I've misunderstood.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
vidarh 8y ago
To me this definition is meaningless. For you to be "making a choice" implies that you have the ability to influence the outcome in some way that is not deterministically dictated by the laws of physics, yet that is also not merely non-deterministic or a combination of some part of each. You seem to basically be arguing that we should define free will in a way that makes it entirely an illusion, yet treat it as meaningful.
- ethbro 8y ago
  Any other definition supposes we have the ability to look at ourselves (who we have the most knowledge about) from an external, omniscient perspective. Otherwise any definition trivially collapses under "Well how do you know that you're acting freely?" Which makes other definitions functionally useless in terms of communicating an idea. I'd rather have a meaningless definition that's useful than a philosophically pure one that's useless. But maybe that's why I'm an engineer. ;)
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]

by ethbro 8y ago

rohit2412 8y ago

So, if I force someone into a work camp and have them dig for 23 years, or put a gun on their head and have them dig for 23 years, or scared them about eternal damnation and have them dig for 23 years? All these cases are free will?

IncRnd 8y ago
Of course. You are presenting a false dichotomy. By its very definition, each of those acts engages one's free will. People have escaped from work camps or revolted. Others have resisted armed attackers. Some have used their god-given intelligence to question other's interpretations of scriptures. and so on...
- thatcat 8y ago
  I don't think resisting armed attackers is technically an act of free will, as it seems quite costly.
  - harperlee 8y ago
    It is an act of free will among 2 options, the risky but valuable and the safe but miserable. The "poor" you end up is not a lack of ability to choose - just that you start from a shitty place.
    - thatcat 8y ago
      My apologies, I've misunderstood.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

vidarh 8y ago

To me this definition is meaningless. For you to be "making a choice" implies that you have the ability to influence the outcome in some way that is not deterministically dictated by the laws of physics, yet that is also not merely non-deterministic or a combination of some part of each. You seem to basically be arguing that we should define free will in a way that makes it entirely an illusion, yet treat it as meaningful.

ethbro 8y ago
Any other definition supposes we have the ability to look at ourselves (who we have the most knowledge about) from an external, omniscient perspective. Otherwise any definition trivially collapses under "Well how do you know that you're acting freely?" Which makes other definitions functionally useless in terms of communicating an idea. I'd rather have a meaningless definition that's useful than a philosophically pure one that's useless. But maybe that's why I'm an engineer. ;)
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]