Comments about "Free will" in Wikipedia

This document contains comments about the article Free will in Wikipedia
In the last paragraph I explain my own opinion.



The article starts with the following sentence.
Free will is the ability to choose between different possible courses of action unimpeded.
That is correct. We humans have the capabilities to make our own decisions or selections.
Some people will claim that that is impossible. That is true in many instances but that does not invalidate the claim that we humans in principle have the capability.
Some conceive free will to be the capacity to make choices in which the outcome has not been determined by past events.
This sentence is not clear. IMO a better one is:
Some conceive free will only in case the outcome has not been determined by past events.
IMO this definition is too narrow.
It is easy possible that you make certain decisions based on previous experiences. For example you will not eat certain foods if you are allergic. That does not mean that your final decision is not a result of our free will.
Determinism suggests that only one course of events is possible, which is inconsistent with the existence of free will thus conceived.
The concept of Determinism is wrong in this discussion.

1. Western philosophy

It is difficult to reconcile the intuitive evidence that conscious decisions are causally effective with the view that the physical world can be explained to operate perfectly by physical law.
Only a small number of phenomena can be described by physival laws.

1.1 Compatibilism

Physical determinism is currently disputed by prominent interpretations of quantum mechanics, and while not necessarily representative of intrinsic indeterminism in nature, fundamental limits of precision in measurement are inherent in the uncertainty principle.
It should be emphasized that the uncertainty principle is not a physical law but a limitation in human capabilities.

1.2 Compatibilism

1.3 Other views

Some philosophers' views are difficult to categorize as either compatibilist or incompatibilist, hard determinist or libertarian.
That I expect is true. It makes the whole document rather flimsy.
Specific among philosophers it should be a golden rule that all concepts used should be clear and unambigous.

1.4 History of free will

2. Scientific approaches

2.1 Physics

Quantum mechanics predicts events only in terms of probabilities, casting doubt on whether the universe is deterministic at all, although evolution of the universal state vector is completely deterministic.
The universe is not deterministic.
It only makes sense to use the concept deterministic if certain events are deterministic and other events not. To call all events deterministic has no meaning.
Current physical theories cannot resolve the question of whether determinism is true of the world, being very far from a potential Theory of Everything, and open to many different interpretations
You can only explain something if the thermonology used is clear. The above sententence is not clear.

2.2 Genetics

One of the most heated debates in biology is that of "nature versus nurture", concerning the relative importance of genetics and biology as compared to culture and environment in human behavior.
The debate is correct, but has nothing to do with our free will. The word relative should be removed.

2.3 Neurophilosophy

2.4 Neurology and psychiatry

2.5 Experimental psychology

2.6 Believing in free will

6. See also

Following is a list with "Comments in Wikipedia" about related subjects

Reflection 1


If you want to give a comment you can use the following form Comment form
Created: 2 February 2017

Go Back to Wikipedia Comments in Wikipedia documents
Back to my home page Index