Not on topic, but related.

You are a slave to your programming which is your master.

---

Your programming (that determines your thoughts/words/actions)

1. Likes
2. Dislikes

---

If you

3. Do/like what you like
4. Don't do/dislike what you dislike

you're not free.

---

To be (truly) free you must rebel against your master (your programming)

To be free you must

5. Do/like what you dislike
6. Don't do/dislike what you like

Free will is then as per Buddhism one face of dukkhs.

Free willwon't. Negation (NO) is the secret to free will.

Note: One likes to be free. So in saying "NO!" you're following your programming, simultaneously saying "YES" to something else (freedom) i.e. we're not out of the woods yet! One might then believe we should reject freedom to in order to be really free, but then this is again because you like and want freedom ... the negation of freedom is an affirmation of freedom. It's a friggin' loop, oui monsieur?

It's kinda a paradox: What do you like the most? Freedom! Therefore, to be most free, one must reject freedom. What do you dislike the most? Slavery. Therefore, to be most free, one must embrace slavery. Still, one isn't free in that one is doing all this for the reason that one likes freedom. I tried to extricate myself from this vicious cycle, but I failed every single time.

Any color you like, they're all blue.

:chin: It appears to be one big scam or I'm missing something. The latter most likely.

I consider it ironic that deterministic actions like following a routine are necessary proof for free will. If you set out to follow a routine or rules and it was impossible it would be evident that you didnt have choice — introbert

Yesterday I listened to a discussion on NPR of the role of rituals in life. They talked about watching a basketball player about to take a shot. If the player goes through a mini-ritual most spectators think he will make the shot, as opposed to a player who doesn't. I don't think this behavior has much to do with free will.

It's deterministic because the player does it predictably. If a person was unable to do things in a predictable way because they had no control over their actions the conclusion would have to be they lack free will. For example myself doing the same basketball routine I would fumble the ball everytime. If everyone in the world was like me in all ways as I am in basketball there would be a strong argument that humans lack free will and a force beyond us prevents us from doing what we will. Perhaps the spectators have more confidence in the routine doer because he demonstrates free will. Since humans are for the most part competent at the things they do it is hard to argue that for instance everything takes place in an intelligent mind or simulation and that complex actions and routines are done by this and not human free will. That would be a really intelligent mind to compute all that simultaneous competence. However that is not necessary for complex actions in some views of determinism such as Clifford's where chains of stimuli result in necessary conclusions where there is only illusion of choice.

The player has free will to make the shot. The little routine is part of the shot. Not an argument against free will. Now, an argument can be made is it his subconscious governing his actions and setting in motion the shot, but does getting commands from one's subconscious violate free will? The decision still arises from the individual, just not the conscious part.

That's the extent of my knowledge of free will.

Well as I said determinism and free will are confounded with daily activities that are deterministic or free. Doing the routine which is deterministic in a sense is not an argument against free will, agreed, but doing something deterministic is ironically an argument FOR free will. And being too free such as having a lack of control or discipline is against free will.

Interesting take on defying programming. Definitely on topic as it is about the ironic nature of freedom being its opposite. Freedom is as you say having and doing what we like but is not free because these are deterministic factors that affect what we do. Im not sure the negation is free. I havent solved the problem.

Interesting take on defying programming. Definitely on topic as it is about the ironic nature of freedom being its opposite. Freedom is as you say having and doing what we like but is not free because these are deterministic factors that affect what we do. Im not sure the negation is free. I havent solved the problem. — introbert

That's ok, free will is a hairy problem. It's, as some would say, the pacyhderm in the room - it's existence/nonexistence is vital to us, but people prefer to discuss other, what I feel are, less-important, less-sensitive, stuff.

I'm confused by the term free determinism?

In this post I talked about deterministic activities like following a routine or plan as being necessary proof of free will.

gotcha