I don't think I'm an 'all knowing' person, but lately I've been reading about the "Free Will' stuff and our existence in this universe is not an accident.
First of all I believe definitions are in order.
The factors are the key feature in the definition of free will.
Can we choose a course of action which is impossible to achieve through physical constraints? I would not be hesitant to say yes, for often I have chose an action which I have later found to be beyond my capability due to 'natural' constraints. The insane may have no such concept of these constraints and will chose to do things that do not happen in reality. Ergo physical constraints are not involved within my argument. What about other constraints?
I would argue that social constraints can similarly be breached if and only if it's within their mental & metaphysical constraints. That is to say the some people can and do chose things that society condemns and prohibits.
What remains are metaphysical and mental constraints. My argument is that even if metaphysical or mental constraints limited a view of free will that is was useful as a construct for progress.
What do I mean when I say that free will is useful as a construct for progress? I mean that the notion of free will engenders actions of an agent with direct responsibility and this direct responsibility being an entry condition for mental constraints would cause an individual to act significantly different for the majority of cases. So to enable society to function and develop individual responsibility of actions and the free will to make the choices and bear the consequences that the choices hold should be a maintained shared illusion.
The accreditation of one's own deeds as a direct implication of your own choices is also, I would argue psychologically healthy in that it could promote betterment of oneself.
Feel free to bring me down on any point of inquiry you wish. And if you feel my argument is not fully tethered down feel free to attack from the broadside. I've got no formal education in philosophy so I've probably missed something.
Free Will: The ability to make choices unconstrained by certain factors.
The factors are the key feature in the definition of free will.
Can we choose a course of action which is impossible to achieve through physical constraints? I would not be hesitant to say yes, for often I have chose an action which I have later found to be beyond my capability due to 'natural' constraints. The insane may have no such concept of these constraints and will chose to do things that do not happen in reality. Ergo physical constraints are not involved within my argument. What about other constraints?
I would argue that social constraints can similarly be breached if and only if it's within their mental & metaphysical constraints. That is to say the some people can and do chose things that society condemns and prohibits.
What remains are metaphysical and mental constraints. My argument is that even if metaphysical or mental constraints limited a view of free will that is was useful as a construct for progress.
What do I mean when I say that free will is useful as a construct for progress? I mean that the notion of free will engenders actions of an agent with direct responsibility and this direct responsibility being an entry condition for mental constraints would cause an individual to act significantly different for the majority of cases. So to enable society to function and develop individual responsibility of actions and the free will to make the choices and bear the consequences that the choices hold should be a maintained shared illusion.
The accreditation of one's own deeds as a direct implication of your own choices is also, I would argue psychologically healthy in that it could promote betterment of oneself.
Feel free to bring me down on any point of inquiry you wish. And if you feel my argument is not fully tethered down feel free to attack from the broadside. I've got no formal education in philosophy so I've probably missed something.
Tags:
My-Write Ups