We all have free will,...don't we?

"We all have free will, don't we?"

 

This in my estimation is a very problematic question for many reasons, but lets just concentrate on few perhaps. First: who are we, second: free compared to what? and thirdly: what is will? fourth: who/what gives this right as in "we have"?

So who are "we"? Human beings? Mammals? Citizens of all countries, the global village inhabitants, citizens of a democratic political system, etc.? What if instead of the term we,  "I" is used; "I have free will don't I?"  The "I" usually belongs to some form of group of other "I's", and even on an individual level, one may ask: if my society consists of only one of me, then can the term "free" be applied?

If the "I" simply acts without any kind of constraints, then one may ask: free as compared to what?

Example: An individual may will to fly, however gravity will promptly remind the individual that without some kind of "wings" or some apparatus alleviating the issue of gravity, no matter how strong the desire or will, the constraint of gravity prevents humans from willing to fly unaided.

The Natural World has boundaries/events/laws/constraints, etc. some of which us humans can not disregard no matter how strong the will/ desire may be to do so, so when it comes to certain physical aspects of our existence one may deduct that in those areas; we do not have free will.

If we have free will, is there a "confined/constricted" will? Are instincts the opposite of free will?

Instincts as defined as: "Instinct or innate behaviour is the inherent inclination of a living organism toward a particular complex behaviour, an impulse or powerful motivation from a subconscious source." (Wikipedia)

Ok, so when we use the phrase: "We all have free will" we perhaps mean in certain areas; the areas to do with conscious choice. We do make many choices and according to some stats, in the hundreds every day.

Example: Ask a two-year-old if he wants a red or yellow drink and he will make his choice without having to do a background check or google for an answer; he will know what he wants.

At two, he is exercising his free will to make his choice. Of course his parents may exercise their free will and say:"Not that one, it's bad for you."

"Of course you can choose what you will, as long as it's according to my will"....:)

When we choose something, do we really do so without any influences? If we equate "free" as "without any constraints" is that actually a reality? Do we not all have our own narratives and do they not influence our choices? (for more info on the narratives, check the "Are we our narratives..." post?)

Habits for instance, may they not be viewed perhaps as possible constraints on our ability to use free will when we make choices?

Example: If you always have a shower first thing in the morning, is that by choice or habit? Do you make a new choice every morning to have a shower, or is the decision based on a previously made choice: "I prefer to shower in the morning"? How many of the actions/decisions we make are based on previously made choices?

If we are influenced by our narratives, and the outcomes of our previously made choices, how free is our will?

Free will as a principle, has many implications: legal, religious, ethical and scientific, for posterity perhaps google it?, this post is just "snack-sized"...

Us humans seem to have a strong sense of freedom; freedom to choose what we want, need, and desire, but what about social consequences when we do so?

What if our actions/choices are in conflict with the society which we belong to?

Roy Baumeister: "Human evolution seems to have created a relatively new, more complex form of action control(social constraints) that corresponds to popular notions of free will. It is marked by self-control and rational choice, both of which are highly adaptive, especially for functioning within culture."

The presence versus the absence of freedom of choice/autonomy affects many aspects of our lives.

We tend to prefer freedom, not only because it offers us the securing of tangible rewards, but we seem to do better in most areas of living.

Example: Motivation..."If we meet the deadline, we'll have a company get-together on the house", "Meet the dead-line or you'll be flat-line".

If by having "Free will" we interpret that as "free of the responsibility for our actions", then who will be responsible?

Example: I exercise my free will to: not get up, not work, speak my mind regardless of how that affects others, etc. etc.

On the other hand, I may choose to exercise my free will to "not do to others what I don't want done to me", I may choose to "be the change I want to see in the world", speak kind words to a broken soul, give a hand to the long-suffering, lend an ear to a friend in need, respect others beliefs, be generous, compassionate and honest.

Regardless of what political or economical system we may live in, on an individual level the freedom to choose our attitude to any given circumstance, remains the domain of our "free will".

 

"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." (Soren Kierkegaard)

"......free will does not mean one will, but many wills conflicting in one man. Freedom cannot be conceived simply"  (Flannery O'Connor)

"No one else can want for me. No one can substitute his act for mine. It does sometime happen that someone very much wants me to want what he wants. This is the moment when the impassable frontier between him and me, which is drawn by free will, becomes most obvious."

( Pope John Paul II )

(ps: about the painting......with my free will and imagination I can travel anywhere at anytime; the painting depicts the destination on such an occasion)