Free-Will: a paradigm or set of concepts and thought patterns related to how we view the world and ways of living. This is my opinion of the definition and is not a dictionary definition.
In the book, The Dictionary of Philosophy, (Dec. 2001) Free will is a doctrine that says that our will is not constricted by previous psychological or physiological conditions. The information that we receive is unbiased in reference to a person’s character, motives and circumstances.
In my opinion: this could refer to:
A. placement in the universe but without being constricted to that idea being predetermined.
B. Brain patterns not being predetermined; how our brains work and therefore our bodies.
C. This type of free-will is decided directly and without forethought and is related only to situations. It is very objective and not subjectively thought about in reference to personal opinions.
Also, in my opinion this type of free-will is beneficial because it is objective. This can benefit all people in the same situation because not one belief system is the controller of it. It allows people to relate to it and make their own decisions based off of the situation seen objectively by each individual. This allows for the situation to be in place without a certain paradigm ruling over the situation.
Another category of free-will that the book, The Dictionary of Philosophy, (Dec. 2001) lists is that we are free to choose and then change to a different choice.
A third category of free-will that is talked about describes how we are able to determine for oneself what one thinks is best, or self-determination. These choices depend on our inner feelings and desires and the paradigm in which we look at the world through. This is very subjective and not constricted by external circumstances.
Predetermination: This doctrine says,
“Purpose set up beforehand.” (Citidel Press pg. 439)
Determinism: This doctrine says,
“Every fact in the universe is guided entirely by law…all facts in the physical universe, and hence, also in human history, are absolutely dependent upon and conditioned by their
causes.” (Citidel Press pg. 140)
In my opinion, we have both free-will and determinism that guides us. I don’t think that we can have one without the other. Also, when free-will is in play we will always have consequences, good or bad. I think that some people have the opinion that free-will means that we are free to do what we want without consequences but that is not true. It is impossible to not have consequences whether they are good or bad consequences. I am not sure if predetermination is really possible. If our situations are predetermined, then it seems like that would take free will and determinism out of the equation and we would be only left with predetermination. That takes law out and the ability to choose out as well. Then we are robots without free-will with no law to guide our decisions. Some people say that there are different types of predetermination but that is very subjective, what would that be based off of? What decisions would be used to determine how we are predetermined or set up before time in what we are doing? Maybe I do not want to be ‘this’ or ‘that’ and who decided it for me? So, in my opinion Free-will and determinism makes sense to me. Determinism talks about cause and effect and the laws of the universe and how they are guided by the laws of the universe themselves. (And we have to throw in the constitution. The law is what saves us) By Margaret Leora Workman; Warponie Art
Reference
Free-will. The Dictionary of Philosophy, Citidel Press. pages 439, 140, 200.
Leave a Reply