The question of whether humans possess free will has been a captivating topic of debate since the time of the Ancient Greeks. This discussion has long been driven by religion, where the predominant view, at least in Abrahamic religions, has been that each human has their own free will, as gifted by God. The Buddha postulated that humans do not have free will in the sense of a self-determining moral power.
Instead, each person has what is called “free action”, but that requires its own discussion. A physicist might argue that all events are predetermined, unavoidable from the conception of the universe. Some philosophers, so-called compatibilists such as Hume and Dennett, even believe that free will and determinism can coexist. The point is, the discussion on free will is a diverse one.
Free Will
Optimists often believe that humans have free will. After all, the idea that we are simply observing our lives unfold as viewers is somewhat hopeless. Free will is most commonly attributed as either a gift from God, or beyond our limited comprehension.
The story of Adam and Eve was a strong example of God’s gift. Eve exercised her free will in order to make the wrong decision. This belief is undeniably more promising and encouraging than its competitor. By enforcing this view, people feel more responsibility for their actions, making us more likely to exercise our free will in order to make morally just decisions.
Unfortunately though, reality is not reliant on how promising or encouraging a viewpoint is. This belief also runs into some contradictions. Many religious views propose that God is all-knowing, that he is aware of the past, present and the future. But how can he both gift us free will and know all our futures?
Some theologians argue that God’s foreknowledge and human free will are not contradictory because God exists outside of time, knowing all events simultaneously. To God, foreknowledge is just knowledge. Others refute that time remains significant to us, and that God’s knowledge of what is, from our perspective, the future, creates a conflict with the concept of free will. However, the possibility of free will remains genuine and cannot be dismissed as mere optimism.
Determinism
Determinism is a more bleak, but increasingly verifiable viewpoint. A determinist will tell you that all our actions and events are determined by previously existing causes that started at the beginning of time. In a deterministic universe, everything occurs as an unfathomably long unbroken causal chain of events; this means that every event is inevitable given the prior state of the universe. People subscribe to this view because of the belief that the laws of physics and nature govern all interactions, no exception (more on that later).
Moreover, determinism suggests that if we knew the exact state of the universe at a given time, and if we had the necessary tools, we could predict the future with 100% certainty. This is of course purely theoretical because there are simply too many factors to measure, but nevertheless an interesting thought.
Digging further into this seemingly logical notion reveals some interesting but worrying talking points. For example, since our actions are predetermined, and we have no real power over them, does that not mean it is unfair to punish others for committing crimes? After all, they were predetermined to commit a crime. Determinism conclusively creates difficult conversations.
But randomness also exists in our universe. In quantum physics, outcomes are determined by probability, introducing randomness at the subatomic level. However, this randomness does not extend to our actions, as quantum mechanics applies only to the smallest particles in existence. Be that as it may, the existence of randomness in reality suggests that there is more to the universe than mere certainty. This suggests that maybe we do not have free will, but everything is also not predetermined… instead, everything is random.
Quantum entanglement, for example, shows that when two particles become entangled, a change in the state of one instantly affects the other, regardless of distance. Imagine two entangled particles placed at opposite ends of the universe—changing the charge of one somehow instantly changes its entangled sibling’s charge, defying Newtonian laws of physics. This challenges our understanding of causality and the traditional science-based argument for determinism.
Concluding…
So, was it really determined from the inception of time that you would read this article? It is true that we have no control over external actions and events, nor can we determine whether free will itself is a reality. What we can control is our reactions. I would suggest that the discussion of free will simply has no bearing on our lives. Whether you are just a vessel, observing the universe unfold, or if you really do have free choice, living by good virtue and abiding to your values is still real. Instead of worrying about what determined your happiness, why not determine somebody else’s?
Ultimately, we don’t know whether we have free will, and I think we can’t ever know. Free will is not tangible, and the infinite complexity of our universe suggests this answer is far out of reach. To me, arguments for free will are too mushy and deal too little with reality, and ironically, determinism is simply too certain, there has to be more to it. At the end of the day, it’s your call which perspective you agree with. Or is it?
Featured Image: ChatGPT
