Free Will v. Fate Resolved?

Greetings. I think I have resolved the matter of fate and free will. Please criticize me. Thank you.

The quandary posed by the perennial matter of fate v. free will is complicated, but I believe I have resolved it as much as such a thing can be resolved.

First, free will in itself is a misnomer--I am not even sure what our will is expected to be free from. External influence? Internal influence? Even if we could live free from all influence whatsoever, which is impossible, we did not create ourselves in the beginning. You would have to be as a god to possess a will that is completely free, and you would have had to have created yourself. We are part of a very large but closed system, and we cannot be free of it. This system is who we are: who we are is totally dependent upon the system.

Forget “free” will. In actuality, this is a matter of will, freedom and fate. In the course of life’s development, it became a will (a thing that performs work to achieve a desired end, with “desired” being the key word: it not only works, but it works toward something purposefully). Whether that will existed in the very beginning is debatable; what is not debatable is that it arose at some point and has continued. Life became a thing that could act not only as it must act but as it chooses to act. This is where “free” will became manifest. It does not actually mean “free”--what it actually means is that life developed, possesses and is a will, a thing that has: a) the ability to conceive of a thing and to perform the work that makes it possible; and b) the desire to do so.

Because of this development – which is really a development in power (the ability to exercise control over what is) – we have today what is recognizable on the surface of our everyday as freedom, a nifty feature for the end-user also known as choice. Freedom, our ability to have and make choices that we prefer, is forever beholden to and conditioned by fate (shaped by our experience, our composition, what the world is, etc.). It is not free.

Thus, you can have more or less freedom. You can be more or less powerful. You cannot have more or less will, and will cannot be more or less free in the sense that it acts sans the influence of the world. The world cannot affect you more or less than it does, though specific phenomena can affect you more or less. Our will can only be more or less free in the sense that we have more or less ability to shape our destiny (freedom) because we have more or less power.

Having more choices does not make your will freer, but it means you have more freedom. For instance, downloading thousands of songs to your iPod would not make your will freer, but it would grant you more freedom (choice) over what you could hear. The willful accumulation and application of power (the invention and distribution of the iPod) has resulted in greater power for you, which results in greater freedom (choice) for your listening pleasure. That you can hear, what you can hear and what you prefer to hear are very much subject to fate and quite limited, but the will to power has effected tremendous control (the ability to influence what is), which results in greater freedom for you.

Essentially, the freedom (choices) we enjoy is a result of humanity having attained incredible power. Human is never “free” in the sense that he can act sans the influence of experience, but he can accumulate and exert more or less power to attain more or less control, which results in his having more or less ability to determine his destiny (freedom).

As concerns what compels us to consider “free” will and fate, our desire to know whether we can affect our destiny or if it is already set, there can be no doubt given my interpretation: we do indeed possess the ability to affect our destiny to a significant degree within a finite system. You make a multitude of choices everyday--who else is making them if not you? Those choices and even your ability to make them are conditioned by the world, so they are not free, but being able to choose is freedom. Truly, freedom is not free, but you have choices to make nonetheless.

The degree to which we can forge our destiny is wholly dependent upon a considerable breadth of conditions that are more than a bit complex. These conditions can, however, be properly simplified so as to be understood as will, power, control and freedom, the four basic phenomena that define who you are.

We certainly do have choices. It's just that they, like us, aren't "free". I added the following to this article this morning. Perhaps it will clarify (and thank you for commenting):

Permit me one more example. You have a choice of three drinks: water, soda and beer. The fact that you need a drink, that drinks refresh us, that we consume liquid through our mouths, etc.--all of this is dictated by the system and ergo not free. None of this was decided by your individual will. However, you can have more or less freedom (choice) as to what you will choose to drink. If water is not an option then you can only choose between beer and soda--you would have fewer choices, or less freedom. If milk and coffee are added to your options, you would have more choices and thus more freedom as to what you would drink; but that you are a thing that drinks, that prefers certain drinks, that must drink, etc.: none of that is free.

None of what you wrote contradicts what I have written above. What I have done here is to look at this dilemma in a way that has never before been considered. It's kinda radical and potentially groundbreaking.

You have/are a will (a thing that performs actions toward a desired end). You have freedom (choices). What you do not have is free will.

In order to have a free will you would have to be a thing that acts free of any conditions whatsoever, including the past and all the things that make us human and define our world. Essentially, you would have to have created yourself and the universe you inhabit.

I hope this helps. I'm not trying to be contentious. I think you are getting ahead to the moral and ethical implications of not having free will. I'm not saying we do not have choices and a duty to ourselves and society. I'm just saying we do not have free will.

"Please criticize me."

Okay.

You write "I think I have resolved the matter of fate and free will" and "The quandary posed by the perennial matter of fate v. free will is complicated..."

But:

Just what is "the matter of fate and free will" that you have resolved? What is the "versus" between fate and free will? I didn't see a problem statement in there.

I counted eight paragraphs and while you mention fate off and on throughout, you don't really address it till the seventh paragraph. It's as if you were trying to convince someone that hamburgers are better than hot dogs and all you wrote about were the hamburgers. The someone wouldn't have sufficient reference points between hamburgers and hot dogs to weigh one against the other and be convinced--or not.

All that might be okay if your post was in a thread relating to an article to which a number of interested readers were attracted and they all understood your post in light of the discussion in the thread. But you posted it as a standalone article for comment and it probably won't mean a lot except to a subset of readers.

"It's actually a chapter from a book, not an article."

That puts it in a different light. The reference points would be elsewhere.

"Are you knowledgeable enough to know what I was talking about?"

To say that my knowledge was superficial would be crediting me too much.

It's not that I never at all thought about free will v fate, but I haven't thought about it in a while. And I never “studied on it” so to speak, therefore I may not assign the same meaning to some words or phrases that a person knowledgeable of the matter would assign.

But in spite (or because) of my limitations I looked at your post again (several times actually) and I don’t think I have the background to provide the criticism you seek.

I’d say freedom is action constrained only by one’s ability. (Not necessarily a good thing if you are not the one.) Following that line, free will would be the act of will constrained only by ability. Without ability an act of will is impossible. With the ability to walk or run, one can do either by an act of will. Without the ability to flap one’s arms and fly there can be no act of will to do so.

As you note, “that we suffer fate is obvious.” And if Fate (however else defined) is something that is beyond one’s control, then Fate can certainly be a constraint on one’s ability and therefore a constraint on free will. Being born color blind is beyond one’s control and a constraint on the ability to discern between some colors.

While Fate can be a constraint on ability and thus on will, it does not follow that Fate is the most significant constraint. The most significant constraint on ability might be will itself. An act of will constrains the ability to do whatever could have been done had there been no act of will. You can’t have turned left and gone to wherever that took you if you turned right and ended up where you are. People sometimes blame Fate when blame really lies with their own acts of will and the intended and unintended consequences thereof.

And I guess after all that I would respond to your statement “I am not even sure what our will is expected to be free from” by saying it is supposed to be free from the constraint on ability that is Fate--but not from the constraint on ability stemming from of its own exercise.

And I would add that one’s will can not be completely free of the restraint on ability that is Fate, not if Fate (however else defined) is something that is beyond one’s control. We all experience a birth that by the conditions of its occurrence puts some restraints on our ability and therefore on our will. And nothing about our birth is within our control. (Actually that is arguable but requires acceptance of existence before conception among other things to consider the argument valid.)

So if free will is an act of will constrained only by one’s ability, and one’s ability may be constrained by Fate which is (however else defined) that which is beyond one’s control, perhaps its not a matter of free will v fate but of free will and fate in conjunction, and determining the boundaries of each. (And not blaming fate for the constraints on ability resulting from one’s own acts of will.)

As to it not being obvious whether our will is free, if free will is the act of will constrained only by one’s ability, then our will is free to the extent our ability is unconstrained. But it is obvious that everyone has some constraint on their ability. What’s not obvious is how much of that constraint is due to fate. I suppose that if fate fully constrains ability then all that happens is a matter of fate not will; that turning right or left is no more an act of one’s will or choice than is the turning left or right of a leaf in an errant wind a matter of the leaf’s will or choice.

Or maybe I’m all wrong.

In any case my string’s run out on this regardless of the imperfections that cry for attention.

Thoughtful response. I will try to adress your concerns.

A few things: I also do not speak philosopherese. If you check out "free will" at wikipedia, it shouldn't take you long before you realize that half of the arguments are supporting the idea that free will doesn't exist in order to support liberal morality and politics, i.e., we have no power over what we are, everything is valid, etc.

The other half lacks common sense and might be purposefully making the problem seem complex so that they can keep their job.

I do not think either half deserves much consideration, and I do not address any of the contemporary views. I purposefully wrote this as clearly as I possibly could to make it accessible.

Second, you're right in that in order to explain such a thing, one must be very careful with his vocabulary.

I will address your concerns later. If we can find a common vocabulary I bet we will find that we are on the same page or not far from it. Have a good weekend!

Dan

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.