1) Free will is the capacity to act at our own discretion, independent of our current surrounding and context, including the physical state of our body and brain
2) Free will is the capacity to act at our own discretion, independent of our current surroundings and context, not including the physical state of our body and brain
Note: In both cases I'm assuming there is no soul, mind beyond the body, etc.
If you define free will as (1), then there is no free will, since any decision will always be subject to the physical state of my body and brain (except, of course, if there's something not physical in play as described in my note).
If you define free will as (2), then there is free will, since despite the context surrounding you, you can still make decisions independent of it.
The same could be applied to a state-machine (finite or not):
1) Free will is the capacity of a machine to produce outputs independent of it's current internal states and the external inputs
2) Free will is the capacity of a machine to produce outputs independent of it's external inputs
(1) means no state-machines have free will, (2) means they can have free will.
The issue with (2) is that the physical state of our body and brain is a function of all past and current surroundings and context (including our genome). Which means it can never be independent, but is instead fully defined.
If you define free will as (2), then there is free will, since despite the context surrounding you, you can still make decisions independent of it.
How do you come to that? Obviously the state of our current surroundings and past histories determines the state of our brain and body (down to the firing of the very last neuron).
Obviously the state of our current surroundings and past histories determines the state of our brain and body (down to the firing of the very last neuron).
That's why I only said "current surrounding and context", I didn't include past histories.
Look at the machine-state example, it makes things more clear.
Comments
Depends on how you define free will:
1) Free will is the capacity to act at our own discretion, independent of our current surrounding and context, including the physical state of our body and brain
2) Free will is the capacity to act at our own discretion, independent of our current surroundings and context, not including the physical state of our body and brain
Note: In both cases I'm assuming there is no soul, mind beyond the body, etc.
If you define free will as (1), then there is no free will, since any decision will always be subject to the physical state of my body and brain (except, of course, if there's something not physical in play as described in my note).
If you define free will as (2), then there is free will, since despite the context surrounding you, you can still make decisions independent of it.
The same could be applied to a state-machine (finite or not): 1) Free will is the capacity of a machine to produce outputs independent of it's current internal states and the external inputs 2) Free will is the capacity of a machine to produce outputs independent of it's external inputs
(1) means no state-machines have free will, (2) means they can have free will.
The issue with (2) is that the physical state of our body and brain is a function of all past and current surroundings and context (including our genome). Which means it can never be independent, but is instead fully defined.
Exactly, so it all depends on how you define free will.
How do you come to that? Obviously the state of our current surroundings and past histories determines the state of our brain and body (down to the firing of the very last neuron).
That's why I only said "current surrounding and context", I didn't include past histories.
Look at the machine-state example, it makes things more clear.