Is free-will an illusion?

Now we got to the point of open lies and deliberate misinforming people who aren't all to familiar with the problem by narrowing definitions to one specific perspective.

Determinism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Determinism is a philosophy stating that for everything that happens there are conditions such that, given those conditions, nothing else could happen. Different versions of this theory depend upon various alleged connections, and interdependencies of things and events, asserting that these hold without exception. Deterministic theories throughout the history of philosophy have sprung from diverse motives and considerations, some of which overlap. They can be understood in relation to their historical significance and alternative theories. Some forms of determinism can be tested empirically with ideas stemming from physics and the philosophy of physics. The opposite of determinism is some kind of indeterminism (otherwise called nondeterminism). Determinism is often contrasted with free will.[citation needed]

Determinism is often taken to mean simply causal determinism: an idea known in physics as cause-and-effect. It is the concept that events within a given paradigm are bound by causality in such a way that any state (of an object or event) is completely determined by prior states. This can be distinguished from other varieties of determinism mentioned below. Other debates often concern the scope of determined systems, with some maintaining that the entire universe (or multiverse) is a single determinate system and others identifying other more limited determinate systems.[clarification needed] Within numerous historical debates, many varieties and philosophical positions on the subject of determinism exist. This includes debates concerning human action and free will, where opinions might be sorted as compatibilistic and incompatibilistic.

Determinism should not be confused with self-determination of human actions by reasons, motives, and desires. Determinism rarely requires that perfect prediction be practically possible – only prediction in theory.

People have tried, you just turn your head the other way and then come back expecting everyone to change their standpoint into what you believe.

c) causality generally requires ordered pairs such that the cause precedes, in time, the effect, but determinism requires a reversible world such that it is unimportant in which order time progresses

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Determinism is often taken to mean simply causal determinism: an idea known in physics as cause-and-effect.

Quote:

c) causality generally requires ordered pairs such that the cause precedes, in time, the effect, but determinism requires a reversible world such that it is unimportant in which order time progresses

Where do you come up with this stuff? Where is the analysis/reasoning that leads you to the conclusion that determinism requires a reversible world. It certaintly does not. Time can run one way and only one way and determinism will hold up just fine. It is constantly out of the blue nonsense with you.

Recurring to basic logic since the Universe didn't cause itself you ought to get out of this Universe to disprove causal determinism !
(One sentence is enough to put a KO on a dinosaur like you !)

Weather the Universe is or is not reversible mathematically depends on knowing what gave birth to the Universe and how it operates

I am still waiting for a justification on the highly orderly state of the Universe at the time of big bang given the the 2 law of thermodynamics

why did it start from an highly ordered configuration and how do you account for that ?

In any case, that reversibility is required by determinism is quite easy to figure out, a determined world is fully mathematically describable and no point in time or space can be privileged, think about it.

Just because we can run the equations in reverse does not mean that we are describing how the universe works by doing so.

But we can run the equations in reverse and this may represent a past event. Just because we can run the equations in reverse does not mean that we are describing how the universe can run backwards by doing so.

So, you reject big bang cosmology?

My point is that you haven't shown without any shred of doubt that the Universe is not reversible mathematically