Elie Bergman
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#1
If an event is said to be random, it is not caused or predetermined by any other event. It simply came into being sporadically. If an event is not random, it is caused by some other event prior to it. This prior event is itself either random or not random.

It is obvious that every event is either random or not random. Lets suppose you want to make a decision. If that decision is random, obviously you had no free will (as free will implies choice and not just random chance). If on the other hand, your decision is not random, then it is caused by some other event. If the other event is random, then again, you have no free will. If the other event is not random, it is caused by some prior event. Repeat this process ad infinitum...

In short, every event is either random or predetermined by the universe. Free will does not exist?
1
reply
chickenonsteroids
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#2
Report 7 years ago
#2
We can have freedom of will if it's non random if you regard us as an initiator of events. If you regard everything in the universe as a set of dominoes you run the risk of not being able to support turtles going all the way down.

Plus, every event being random is just false.
0
reply
Forum User
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report 7 years ago
#3
Free will has always struck me as a magical sort of claim. If one accepts that humans are just atoms, and that those atoms interact with each other in accordance with the rules of physics, chemistry, and what have you, then where can free will come into it?

Of course, a religious person or someone who believes in a 'soul' or whatever it might be, would argue that 'souls' are not governed by the normal rules of physics and chemistry and that humans are more than just atoms. But I don't see how it can be consistent to believe in free will unless one believes in a 'soul'.
1
reply
Jam'
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#4
Report 7 years ago
#4
If there exists some event that is predetermined (i.e. not random) then this implies that this event is dependent upon some other event. The event is it dependent upon is either going to be random or not random:

If random: then our initial event was random too but this is a contradiction. If an event is dependent on a random event, it is random itself. Consider the function that takes the inputs of a toss of a coin: H or T and attributes a number accordingly, namely H->1, T->2. This numeric value is dependant upon a random value and we know that it will be random. We cannot systematically determine what its value will be.

If not random: then we have an event that is not random dependent upon an even that is not random. But because it is not random, this new event that our original event is dependent upon is therefore dependent upon another event. But this occurs ad infinitum and it does not make sense to suggest that two events are dependent upon one another as that institutes a cyclical argument. As a result, our initial event cannot be dependent upon another dependent event, and must be dependent upon a random event. But by our argument above, that causes a contradiction.

Considering the only assumption we made was that there exists a predetermined event and that there are only two kinds of events: random and non-random, we can now conclude, by contradiction that there exists no event that is predetermined event OR there exists another class of event that is neither "random" nor "non-random".

****.
1
reply
Freier._.lance
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#5
Report 7 years ago
#5
There is no free will. No argument has ever been given in its favour. I'm surprised this question is still even asked.
0
reply
Are you Shaw?
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#6
Report 7 years ago
#6
(Original post by Freier._.lance)
There is no free will. No argument has ever been given in its favour. I'm surprised this question is still even asked.
... not familiar with compatibilism held by philosophers such as Hume?
0
reply
Stanno
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#7
Report 7 years ago
#7
(Original post by Are you Shaw?)
... not familiar with compatibilism held by philosophers such as Hume?
From what I've gathered in a few seconds of googling, Hume just defines free will more loosely than people generally define it to be.
0
reply
Freier._.lance
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#8
Report 7 years ago
#8
(Original post by Are you Shaw?)
... not familiar with compatibilism held by philosophers such as Hume?
You really think compatibilism is a strong enough argument for the existence of free will?
0
reply
Elie Bergman
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#9
(Original post by Jam')

If not random: then we have an event that is not random dependent upon an even that is not random. But because it is not random, this new event that our original event is dependent upon is therefore dependent upon another event. But this occurs ad infinitum and it does not make sense to suggest that two events are dependent upon one another as that institutes a cyclical argument.

****.
Just because this process recurs ad infinitum does not seem to imply anything nonsensical. There is nothing wrong in suggesting every event is pre-determined by the big bang or the origin of the universe. What determined that? This is tricky and I'm not sure even the greatest scientists have an answer as of yet. However the question I asked was on the existence of free will. Surely a scientific determinism obliterates this possibility? What do you think.
0
reply
Stannisbaratheon
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#10
Report 7 years ago
#10
I freee will dooes nott exist why did I miss spell some word on purpose?
0
reply
lucaf
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#11
Report 7 years ago
#11
very well put OP!
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Feeling behind at school/college? What is the best thing your teachers could to help you catch up?

Extra compulsory independent learning activities (eg, homework tasks) (13)
7.1%
Run extra compulsory lessons or workshops (30)
16.39%
Focus on making the normal lesson time with them as high quality as possible (30)
16.39%
Focus on making the normal learning resources as high quality/accessible as possible (27)
14.75%
Provide extra optional activities, lessons and/or workshops (50)
27.32%
Assess students, decide who needs extra support and focus on these students (33)
18.03%

Watched Threads

View All