rufio stated:
Quote:"For instance, if you want to take a metaphorical approach, if a man is walking down a path, and the path goes in only one direction, he is bound to that direction. But if he comes to a fork in the path, he is free to choose either fork. As long as he remains at the fork, he is in a state of freedom - and as soon as he chooses which path to take he is bound again. So being free is really being indecisive - which to me seems to go against the idea of free will which I conceive as being powered by the choices you make, not your inability to make them. Thus "free will" is not referring to a state of being free, but to the ability to bind yourself to whatever you choose."
This is an interesting observation.
I agree that the moment of indecision as to which "fork" or action to take does not demonstrate the existence of free will in the agent mentioned. This simply recalls the classic tale of Buridan's Ass, who caught equidistant between two piles of food, could not decide from which to partake, its indecision resulting in its death.
The case of Martin Luther's stand against the Roman Catholic Church may demonstrate something deeper and perhaps more important in our human ability to demonstrate "Free Will".
When it was demanded (under pain of dire consequences) that he repudiate his stated and published views as to man's ability to talk directly to God sans clerical intermediaries, Martin Luther refused, stating: "Here I stand, I can do no other".
This would imply that Luther's decision was no snap judgment but something that was mulled over and given a great deal of consideration over a long period of time. Such a long decision process could, conceivably, be subject to myriad affectations involving many "random" or even "quantum" fluctuations. Well perhaps, but it would seem such a long term formation of an opinion may point more towards the agent's control of the decision process then that of stray neutrinos building upon and resulting in such end results. Indeed, what we see in this instance may be self forming actions (SFAs) which are certainly deterministic but which have their basis in Luther's "striving will". Such will implies trying or endeavoring towards a specific end over a long period of time. This would speak more towards the "free will" of the agent doing the determining and not causation from stray nuclear particles or quantum effects. So we then see Luther, affected by his former thought processes, come to the determination that when push came to shove he could "...do no other".
Relative stated:
Quote:"Free will must be something that goes against entropy a bit - just adding the little extra push to the evolution..."
Kind of like life itself. Thus, we see the chemical basis of self organization leading to self replicating molecules building into RNA and DNA. At some point organ systems being developed and such symbiosis manifested in living organisms. In turn, we see the development of intelligence as a serendipitous side effect. What could be more apparent than the possibility of such life systems containing decision making processes coupled with a "look ahead" ability further allowing perpetuation of the species? Such decision making ability made good use of the future modeling abilities contained in our minds.
In short,"Free Will" has evolved from intelligence just as intelligence evolved from life itself. "Intelligence", as Carl Sagan has said, "is a way for the Universe to know itself". Free will, perhaps, is a way for the Universe to change its own destiny.
JM
