Why 'Free Will' is Logically Impossible

[Rational Atheist]

Here is a simple, yet powerful, argument against the idea that we 'freely' choose our actions.

1. Our thoughts determine our choices.

2. We do not freely choose our thoughts.

3. Therefore, our choices cannot be free.

I don't think anyone would object to premise 1, especially those who believe in free will, since by definition, a "free" choice, if it could exist, requires a person to consciously make it, which by definition involves thought. Premise 2 may be controversial to some, but with a simple thought experiment, it can be proven to be true. If a person could freely choose their thoughts, then they would have to be able to consciously choose what they were going to think before actually thinking it. In other words, there would have to be a time before a person thinks a thought that that thought was consciously chosen by a person, which literally entails the necessity of being able to think a thought before one thinks it. This, of course, is a logical contradiction. Ergo, free will does not exist.

[Swami]

[Replying to Tcg in post #40]

I do not accept your terms. Why should I? You are a skeptic, unwilling to experience what I have experienced.

When you are willing to learn and experience, then I am willing to debate you.

Can someone debate on a book that they have never read?

[Tcg]

[Replying to Tcg in post #40]

I do not accept your terms. Why should I? You are a skeptic, unwilling to experience what I have experienced.

When you are willing to learn and experience, then I am willing to debate you.

Can someone debate on a book that they have never read?

They are not "my terms." This a debate sub-forum. Debate is supported by evidence not vague claims (as judged by you) of greater experience. Additionally, resorting to an Ad Hominem rather than addressing the deficiencies in your claim is a logical failure.


Tcg

[Seek]

Logic cannot answer existential questions like free will.

[Miles]

Logic cannot answer existential questions like free will.

I'll give it a shot.

All free actions are uncaused (by definition of "free": free of causation)
No willing is uncaused...........(if not, please cite a willing event that has no cause.)
-----------------------------------
No willing is a free action...... (hence: no such thing as a free will)

.

[The Tanager]

All free actions are uncaused (by definition of "free": free of causation)
No willing is uncaused...........(if not, please cite a willing event that has no cause.)
-----------------------------------
No willing is a free action...... (hence: no such thing as a free will)

Why do you define free in that way?

[thomasdixon]

No willing is a free action...... (hence: no such thing as a free will)[/indent]

I chose to respond to this endless looping topic because I, and I alone chose to do so, because, because I chose to do so.
Which is the definition of free will.
free will noun
Definition of free will
1: voluntary choice or decision
I do this of my own free will
2: freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention
Freewill | Definition of Freewill by Merriam-Webster
free will
noun
the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion.
….,.,
Free will is the capacity of agents to choose between different possible courses of action unimpeded.
Free will - Wikipedia

[Miles]

All free actions are uncaused (by definition of "free": free of causation)
No willing is uncaused...........(if not, please cite a willing event that has no cause.)
-----------------------------------
No willing is a free action...... (hence: no such thing as a free will)

Why do you define free in that way?

Because quite often the will is said to be free because nothing causes it.



.

[The Tanager]

All free actions are uncaused (by definition of "free": free of causation)
No willing is uncaused...........(if not, please cite a willing event that has no cause.)
-----------------------------------
No willing is a free action...... (hence: no such thing as a free will)

Why do you define free in that way?

Because quite often the will is said to be free because nothing causes it.

I would agree that a will is free in the sense of being uncaused (and thus agree with your conclusion given your definition), but free actions are not uncaused according to people who believe in free will. The will is said to be the cause of the free action.

[Miles]

All free actions are uncaused (by definition of "free": free of causation)
No willing is uncaused...........(if not, please cite a willing event that has no cause.)
-----------------------------------
No willing is a free action...... (hence: no such thing as a free will)

Why do you define free in that way?

Because quite often the will is said to be free because nothing causes it.

I would agree that a will is free in the sense of being uncaused (and thus agree with your conclusion given your definition), but free actions are not uncaused according to people who believe in free will. The will is said to be the cause of the free action.

I believe the issue rests on one's definition of "will," and personally, I like the Cambridge Dictionary definition:

Will
noun
"the mental power used to control and direct your thoughts and actions, or a determination to do something, despite any difficulties or opposition."

Although I see no good reason for the "despite any difficulties or opposition" notation.

In any case, and in short, the question then arises about how one's thoughts and actions arise. Why did you think or do A instead of B? If one claims it's simply a matter of choice the problem is hardly resolved, but shifted to another issue begging explanation: Why choose A instead of B? If it's all a mater of pure randomness then it's not a choice or an operation of a will at all. So you have to have some reason driving your choice, say reason X, but just where did this reason come from? It really doesn't matter, because whatever it is it didn't prompt reason Y or Z or . . . to materialize. So one is left at the mercy of reason X (or some other reason that would prompt A instead of B). Therefore, thought or action A was inevitable: the will was not free to do other than what was directed to do. In fact, there was no actual choosing at all. Choice and choosing remain fictions of the imagination.


.

[The Tanager]

In any case, and in short, the question then arises about how one's thoughts and actions arise. Why did you think or do A instead of B? If one claims it's simply a matter of choice the problem is hardly resolved, but shifted to another issue begging explanation: Why choose A instead of B? If it's all a mater of pure randomness then it's not a choice or an operation of a will at all. So you have to have some reason driving your choice, say reason X, but just where did this reason come from? It really doesn't matter, because whatever it is it didn't prompt reason Y or Z or . . . to materialize. So one is left at the mercy of reason X (or some other reason that would prompt A instead of B). Therefore, thought or action A was inevitable: the will was not free to do other than what was directed to do. In fact, there was no actual choosing at all. Choice and choosing remain fictions of the imagination.

But why is that reason(s) judged to be a good reason?