Free will does not exist, everything is 100% deterministic. There is no "randomness", it's a shim we use when we haven't discovered the physical law governing a process.
"Mensch kann zwar tun, was er will, aber er kann nicht wollen, was er will."
I agree.
Nothing good comes out of thinking free will doesn't exist. It is just a massive cop-out.
Furthermore a lot of history cannot be properly explained without it.
Last, even if it somehow was true and every act of defiance was just a mental illness everyone would be better of not being aware of it.
In fact anyone that mentions that free will doesn't exist actually makes me appreciate even more that I have one and also to embrace the opportunities it gives me.
There, see you later :-)
Also what if there is overwhelming evidence that something is untrue. You trust the evidence but you still "believe" the thing the evidence contradicts?
How do you explain this? I cannot identify with this interpretation of the world. Say I'm looking at a rock and you're looking at a rock. But despite All evidence on the contrary I "believe" the rock doesn't exist. How would I explain my reasoning?
I think all beliefs must come from some nonzero amount of evidence. They seem absurd when evidence from one domain is transferred to a different domain in order to support some statement.
I think everything is deterministic because I can't imagine true randomness. It's a concept we use to represent lack of information.
I don't have a good grasp of quantum physics and I think every process described as random is like a coin flip: the outcome seems "random", but in reality you would be able to predict it if you had 1. enough information about the initial conditions 2. sufficiently accurate knowledge of the presumably deterministic physical laws governing the process.
It seems simpler to assume we just don't know, rather than attributing it to the unusual property of true unpredictability. We already know that a chaotic dynamic system is difficult to predict, and even encryption algorithms we conjure up have very high entropy. So why isn't that enough here?
TLDR: "Not only can we experience, for example, falling, but we can also reflect on that experience and create change based on that reflection.... This implies that human free will is the sole known entity in the universe capable of eliciting change based on conscious reflection."
(Funny article, anyway!) [https://thenextweb.com/news/theoretical-physicists-think-hum...]
What is "conscious" reflection? I think "consciousness" is another one of those terms that masks our fundamental misunderstanding of how things work.
The tie between intelligent design and Christianity isn't a necessary one. Deists could believe in intelligent design and be consistent; Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims and Jews as well.
Furthermore, not all Christians would subscribe to "free will" (as in libertarian free will, the flavor that most people subscribe to). A lot of more conservative traditions would affirm soft-determinism or even fatalism.
I suppose so. As far as I’m aware, it grew out of a need for Christians to present a scientific-seeming theory to explain the evidence supporting evolution, without supporting evolution. I imagine other religious groups might have a similar need, but Intelligent Design is one that Christians came up with.
> Furthermore, not all Christians would subscribe to "free will"
This I don’t understand at all. You may be correct, but I don’t see how it makes any sense. Without free will how could there be sin, and without sin what did Christ die to save us from?
There are various parts of the Bible which suggest free will does not exist, and belief in predestination has a long history in Christianity. This verse in Romans is a good example:
-----
Not only that, but Rebekah’s children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”
What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,
“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?
-----
Of course, there is also plenty of evidence for free will in the Bible, the Genesis account being one example. And trying to square that circle can get complicated[0,1].
[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will_in_theology#In_the_B...