Does free will exist?

I frame the problem very simply, my "choices" have reasons they don't come out of the blue. I chose what I need. If I need a glass of water I go and get one, if I feel the need to go for a walk I go for a stroll, if I feel I need a snack I eat. None of these choices was free. My volition acted according to my CIRCUMSTANTIAL needs! The day I can choose my needs and act accordingly with them then perhaps I will be a step closer of having some degree of freedom....problem being even in such a place the needs I would chose would have reasons to...for some of us who really take the time and care to think about it we don't see any degree of freedom in our choices as people always beg the question. Hence why we ask if there is a metaphysical something freeing us from our worldly constraints? Unfortunately this very simple question seems to transcend the understanding of those who carelessly reply "no our freedom is all perfectly natural"...heck is the question that hard to grasp???

...oh and don't get me started when ppl come with stuff like,"you can feel thirsty but postpone drinking" and so on...because those kinds of excuses also have REASONS!!! If I postpone X, Y, Z, need its because ANOTHER need takes precedence because it is more URGENT! Again how is this hard to grasp???

Making choices is a description of events one witnesses. The reasons for the choices is what can be studied and explained beyond self report. People also do many things admittedly for reasons that they themselves cannot explain. A lot of time can be wasted trying to unlock the supposed unconscious reasons for a person's actions. Whether the person concedes that they cannot explain their behavior, or why they like what they like, or that they feel completely assure that they can explain the reasons, the history of consequences to which a person is exposed can be shown as the originating source for what a person does.

Well, yes. It's also the reason you have a brain. To make choices.

But is the brain the originating source of the choice or does it mediate? If it originates, then does that mean that it is processing bits of information that are stored in the brain? If the brain stores information, then there should be evidence of single points in the brain responsible for specific thoughts; more specific than general regions of the brain having general functions. The metaphor for several decades now is that the brain is like a computer with a storage and retrieval system, but has the very popular metaphor held up to the evidence?

While the brain is not exactly a Turing machine it still processes information on the base of its inputs and needs...I don't see the word freedom fitting in anywhere in that process. But then again, this topic of contention between us is old...thankfully we agree on many other things.

That metaphor was proven wrong in the 80s or 90s. I could dig up more if you're interested. The bottom line is that neural networks are (by definition and behaviour) non-local. That may be why our brain can still work in spite of losing neurons every day. Try that with a computer: kill a few transistors in their chip day after day, and see if they can still compute after 10 ir 20 years of that... :-)

Yes, you and I have been throught all that more often that we care to count. In your language I am a underterminist-compatibilist.

Free will huh, or is it the order of things?

All things stand alone in appearance, and task purposed to do, no exceptions. For example, a man, a tree, a mountain, a river, whatever humanly one views objectively, including themselves, stand alone physically, mentally and spiritually.

Ideas, image, businesses, buildings, organizations, and even dreams stand alone, at inception of thought in consciousness and mind. Free will becomes an issue when each directive thought appear independent, yet find they must follow the dictates of a pattern initiated from a principle. As man and tree follows the dictates of parental seeds, develop, take form, sprout branches, which birth limbs, which birth leaves and fruits, or body parts; each procedure seem independent from the parent seed. The reality, everything is guided and initiated to perform according to the law of "everything after its kind."

Such is free will, and all within it uniform structure, including the Pattern of thoughts received and directed by this law. This law cannot be by-passed, it is the inevitable living law. One can hee-haw and say they have done this or that by their own choice according to their freedom to do so, but as all thoughts and projections, they have a path of order to follow as Halley's Comet has followed Its orbit of gravitational order for longer than any man can say. Wonder whose will Halley's Comet follow?

Never give power to anything a person believe is their source of strength - jufa

"You can't be the cause of yourself" sums it up. We are the products of things that have been passed down, and we don't get to step outside of the stream of causes and effects to create something that comes from within; that originates from within and also is disconnected from the material world.

I think I posted on this thread before - Never mind - I'm, intentionally, forgetting more than I'm caring to remember, nowadays.
I've figured-out the 'Free Will' thingy, though.
I'll explain it further, should anyone choose - But, to sum it up - YES, It EXISTS! And NO, It Doesn't!

That's Neither 'Duality' Nor 'Polarity', btw.

I cannot argue for it. It might appear that we are programmed in our actions and seems to apply in the robotic nature and habits we show. Some are enslaved in religious rituals, but there are robotic aspects in personal lifestyles.
Free Will was a gift at the beginning and was a personal choice. The way it was used at some stage was corrupted. We have not used it well.
In the path of the Soul Freewill is abandoned. Close analysis shows that it was never really free. Meanwhile we should try to use what we have of free will and intent in unselfish service, which in these days forms a powerful Yoga.

Ok, but the point that remains unclear to me is the reason for postulating the existence of a will to describe the reasons one does something. You say it exists, but how did you establish its existence without it being contained in a premise of your argument? I'd be interested to know.

Looks close to my take (compatibilism). Please do share.

Indeed.
Free Will is - A human concept.
It implies that your actions are your own choosing.

But, your 'actions' are responses to criteria 'beyond' the spectrum of your 'own' control.
Are they not?

Thus - The ONLY conclusion is -

I'm NOT your babysitter - The answer is Clear.
Enjoy being you, and try not to spoil it for anyone else.

The question isn't what is a claim about freewill, it's how do you establish the will as a causal event to your actions?

"Free Will"
Is...

A 'human' Concept - Derived from 'self-relativity' (Godliness) - If you believe your will is your own - YOU ARE GOD!

You deny ALL externalities having persuasive impacts upon YOUR own actions.

GOD=EVERYTHING = EVERYTHING=GOD.
My advice to you is...
Listen to Gilmore's 'Comfortably Numb' solo, at Pulse 94.
It's very AWESOME!

Can't disagree with you here



I think this is pretty much right. To be the uncaused causer of your thoughts and actions is to be somewhat godlike; which wouldn't be my position either.

As far as Compatibilism goes I am willing to go this far:

No people never did have Free Will, but people never asked for it nor have they been unhappy with what they got. You will what you must and you like what you must will.