The discourse surrounding free will has occupied thinkers for millennia, a persistent philosophical quandary that touches the core of human experience, responsibility, and the very nature of reality. Is our path predetermined by an unbreakable chain of cause and effect, or do we possess the genuine capacity to author our own actions and shape our destinies? This exploration delves into a perspective that eschews a simple dichotomy, proposing instead a complex interplay between deterministic forces and the potential for authentic free will. Reality is perceived as neither purely deterministic nor purely embodying free will, though in my “opinion” there is a significant inclination towards the potential of free will. This exploration unpacks this nuanced stance, examining the proposed mechanisms, prerequisites, and implications of what is termed "free will."
The central assertion is that while deterministic elements undeniably influence existence, free will emerges as a profound, albeit demanding, human capability, a phenomenon intertwined with consciousness, responsibility, and a cyclical interplay of specific character traits. This is not a debate to be settled definitively, but rather an elucidation of a particular perspective on these profound matters. Although this is designed with having “Free Will” in the primary lens, but one can just reverse it or see the chiral of it for Determinism. It’s not simple and clear negation, but if one uses their mind, then it won’t be much hard to see from the other side. Think of it as, “exercise left for the reader”.
The traditional debate often frames determinism and free will as mutually exclusive. Determinism, in its classical sense, suggests that all events, including human cognition and action, are causally necessitated by antecedent events in conjunction with the laws of nature. Conversely, libertarian free will posits that individuals have the power to make choices that are not entirely determined by prior causes. This analysis, however, steps away from an "either/or" conclusion. Reality is considered to be neither fully deterministic nor entirely an expression of free will.
This perspective extends to other fundamental dichotomies, such as subjectivity and objectivity. Reality, including ethical systems, is often a mixture of such poles and dichotomies, and wisdom lies in the ability to discern which conceptual framework to apply at which time. This "wisdom" involves a dynamic rather than static understanding of these fundamental concepts. The misuse of these philosophies, applying them rigidly or out of context for manipulation, control or power, signifies a lack of wisdom and can potentially lead to detrimental outcomes. The idea is that individuals can, through specific developed capacities, navigate and even transcend certain deterministic pathways to free will.
A critical linkage is proposed between free will and consciousness. Free will is considered a phenomenon of consciousness, a humane ability particularly developed in humans, stemming from our unique conscious experience. This connection is offered as an observed correlation: wherever there is consciousness, there is a chance of free will. However, consciousness alone is not sufficient for the manifestation of free will. Although free will may be seeded in consciousness, it is not all that is essential for it to manifest. It is not necessary that if a human possesses consciousness, they will automatically have free will. Consciousness provides the fertile ground, but other factors, developed traits and choices, are necessary for free will to blossom.
A distinction is made between animalistic traits, evolved from our biological heritage through evolution, and "humane abilities", which are considered unique to humans, with free will being a prime example of the latter. Even if one were to accept concepts like panpsychism, where consciousness might be a fundamental feature of reality, present even in entities like rocks, such entities would still lack the other essential components and traits for free will. A fascinating recursive element is introduced: being able to choose whether to pursue free will or a deterministic path is also a part of free will. This self-referential or recursive aspect means that having the free will to choose free will is, in itself, an exercise of free will.
Before exploring the more intricate cycle, a fundamental relationship is established: awareness leads to free will, which is intrinsically a responsibility, and this combination provides power. This sequence forms the conceptual backbone of the presented model.
This triad, Awareness leading to Free Will/Responsibility, which in turn yields Power, is presented as a direct pathway, with the understanding that tracing power back can also lead to enhanced awareness, hinting at a cyclical reinforcement even in this foundational structure.
The core of this philosophical framework is a detailed, bidirectional cycle composed of several interconnected elements: Free Will, Power, Responsibility, Courage, Conviction, Strength, Purpose, Suffering, Honesty, Confrontation, and Awareness. This cycle is characterized by symmetry and interdependence among its elements, and it can be traversed in multiple ways. It is a bidirectional cycle, meaning influence flows in both directions. The elements of this cycle, as visually conceptualized, place Free Will at the apex, with Power and Awareness as adjacent components.
All elements within this cycle can lead towards free will, and also influence each other. For instance, courage can lead towards responsibility and power (and thus free will in one direction of the cycle), and it can also arise from conviction and strength (which themselves are part of the cycle leading to free will). The entry point into this cycle can vary based on an individual's inherent strengths or current state; one can reach free will from any point by properly following the other paths. The proposed flow and the interrelation of these elements, primarily following one major path as elucidated, while acknowledging the reverse is also implied.