UNIVARSITY.ORG | The Case for Free Will
Interesting information about Universities
information about Universities, University, complete university guide, university league tables, which university should i go to, which university course is right for me, which university gives the most scholarship, iipm affiliated to which university, which university is best for mba distance education, which university is the best in the world,
single,single-post,postid-36285,single-format-standard,ajax_leftright,page_not_loaded,,qode-title-hidden,qode-theme-ver-7.6.2,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-4.6.2,vc_responsive

02 Sep The Case for Free Will

To help support this ministry click here: http://www.patreon.com/inspiringphilosophy

What does Alvin Plantinga, Ayn Rand, and Michio Kaku have in common? They all say we have free will. This is a case for free will and a refutation of Sam Harris’s book free will.
How Free Will Works:

Law of Identity Objection:

Sources in Order:

“Free Will” by Sam Harris

Michio Kaku on free will:

“Bait and Switch” by Alvin Plantinga

“Our Cultural Value-Deprivation,” The Objectivist, April, 1966, 2

Free Will Theorem: http://www.ams.org/notices/200902/rtx090200226p.pdf

Free Will Objectivism Fail: Two Mathematicians Demonstrate that Ayn Rand’s Philosophy is Incoherent






*If you are caught excessively commenting, insulting, or derailing then your comments will be removed. If you do not like it you can watch this video:

“Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.”

  • Abhishek shah
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    If the human brain is made of particles following the laws of physics, that means that it can be simulated in principle. This simulation will also claim that she is conscious and has free will. But, we already knew that didn't we?

  • Luke Merrill
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Even if the universe is not deterministic free will can't exist without the soul or some equivalent. Even though it is random you yourself have no influence over quantum mechanics.

  • Zero 01111010
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    The funny things is this actually makes a much better case for free will than the big think video that we see shown here more than once.

  • Comment Connoisseur
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Can someone explain to me the link between idealism and indeterminism, realism and determinism?

  • Kanzu999
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    We already established that if the universe is deterministic, then we can't have free will.

    If we then add quantum mechanics, an element of randomness, what does that do? Is there freedom in randomness? No. Instead of our actions being completely determined, they will just be slightly more random. Where is the free will in that?

  • Moist Von Lipwig
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    sam's argument against free will is basically that we had a thought before we were aware that we generated the thought. clearly, he has never experienced input/output lag in videogames.

  • BarcaFans HD
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Interesting that hard determinism is actually the minority position in philosophy.

    Never knew

  • Nathan Ormond
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Im sorry we keep debating Calvinism – I can't help it!

  • WHWWD And Philosophy
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Uncertainty is just that: Uncertainty… it is not free will….

  • D an Newman
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    pls respond but surely pre determinism doesnt diminish free will just someone can predict your choice with 100 percent accuracy it doesn't mean u didnt chose it

  • NotzriFey4447
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Wouldn’t a Compatilist theory be more rational?

  • saif almadani
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    God does have maximal autonomy

  • Uber Genie
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    We don't need a GUT or quantum indeterminacy as a explication of free will! Is God physical? Is he somehow material? Of course not. Yet he interacts causally with physical objects. So too, if our souls are immaterial, and I believe they are, then we have thoughts and intentions, memories, qualia all originate in an immaterial mind that tightly interacts bidirectionally with a material body via the brain. No material explanation required.

    The scientists you introduce 7 mins or so into the video are assuming naturalism presuppositionally. That is false. As a Theist I already have falsified materialism and naturalism. God is immaterial and has causal influence over the physical world. Full stop!

  • Slippysquid
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    If god knows all he knows what you’ll do if someone can know your future which means your life is predetermined

  • Michael Navarro
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    The bottom line is that Atheists hold these sort of positions in order to avoid responsibility to a higher authority, i.e. God and they hate anyone or anything that advocates or affirms a God.  They want to be their own god.

  • Enraged Grape
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    This makes me feel so much better, I was very disturbed by the idea of free will not existing.

  • Justa Naym
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Nah, check it:
    1) Focus and thinking are not in our control, for what you focus on is determined by your environment and what you're thinking is determined by past experience.
    2) Randomness such as quantum physics is also evidence against free will, because random means we dont understand it whereas free will asserts we understand the choice to be of our own making.
    3)FINISH HIM: Every decision is made based off of what's available, what we prefer, and what we think is true- none of which are up to us. FATE ALITY

  • primovid
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    …but you are missing Sam Harris's second point which is that if we don't have a deterministic universe, then actions are based on chance. Random chance does not free will make. If your decisions were like rolling dice, then you would have no conscious "say" in what happened. Quantum mechanics states that particle, while still having uncertain properties, behave based on probability.

  • meow meow meow
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    See Sean Carroll and David Albert on the collapse of the wave function and why it doesn't require observers. Carroll has been especially compelling in his arguments.

  • Clint Abrahams
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Isn't focusing your mind a choice? So you're arguing that because you can choose to focus your mind
    You have the ability to choose chocolate or vanilla ice cream
    But how do you know that ability to choose to focus on one thing rather than another is not also determined

  • Mark Hollingsworth
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    There is no free will.i saw theWTC attack 1 week before it happened..in an awake vision..my story is in the jan2004 edition of Fate magazine

  • John Smith
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    If a man's actions are based on the result of a coin flip, are his actions free?

  • Fahimus Alimus
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Do you think it’s possible for quantum physics to make the logically impossible possible? Like square circles?

  • Cell Creator
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Try to think for yourself. You list a bunch of quotes and prove nothing. Start from the terms FREE and then WILL. Explain extensively what they mean and what they don`t. Then make a video proving that there is a thing such as `Free Will` in accordance with your explanation of the terms and without simply quoting others.

  • justanothervote
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Thanks great video!

  • Jack The Boss
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    You committed a straw man and a black and white fallacy.

    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    I've been torn on this for a long time, and I honestly cannot pick a side. I've always been slightly leaning towards the determenistic side, however I give free will many oppertunities to sway me.

    As it pertains to the free will argument, if free will is defined by "focusing and thinking", could the determinist not simply respond by saying that those exact thoughts and times you focus are determined? I feel like this "focusing and thinking" event is just a description of what it feels like to think before making (what we beleive to be) a free action. I don't see how the determinist is hindered what-so-ever by this argument.

    Am I missing something?

  • Bender Rodriguez
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    there is no such thing as a one sided coin. The universe is both free and determined certain degrees. The universe is a series of coin tosses with determined trajectories with the possibility of interception.

  • Ershad Zafar
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Free will and then there is destiny too.. Destiny is the number of choices we have.. And free will makes us choose

  • Aerex12
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    I am 3 min to this video in and it still doesn't have any good counter to Sam Harris. No matter what you your choices they are still dictated by either your biology or your environment.

    Also, I dont think changing the definition to free will to the ability of making a choice makes any sense to me.

  • Philosophical Thinker
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Hello inspiring philosophy! I want to tell you that in your word press article linked under another comment ( https://inspiringphilosophy.wordpress.com/2017/08/03/rationalityrules-does-not-understand-philosophy/), it is wrong about fatalism.

    It takes the idea that there is only one form of fatalism, but that is not true. Here is a website that shows why:

    Last thing I want to mention is that rationality rules was stating that the uncertainty principle is just that nothing can be determined by means of measurement when dealing with the "quantum realm". Although you may have talked about that idea in different videos, he was only responding to this one. He doesn't have to look at your other videos to respond to (at least seemingly,) incorrect claims and arguments. Reason being is that not everyone who watches the video will end up watching more of your videos because some may be new. Like me, I am new to this channel, and although you may have said that you have gone deeper into a topic on a separate video, I have not seen them yet. Just like I haven't seen the videos where you go deeper into the subject you were talking about in the article.

  • William Kanel
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    This still doesn't support free will. Okay so are actions aren't predetermined, it's just a roulette wheel in our head, we still don't have free will.

  • William Kanel
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Where my determinism gang at?

  • will young
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    If free will means I have the final say into what action I take. We do not have free will. If you where in a maze and chooses to make a right or left doesn't mean you have free will. The maker of the mazes determine weather you could go left or right. God said I set life and death before you chose Life. Only God have true sovereignty.

  • Edward Fitzgibbon
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Your videos are excellent……..PLEASE don't use the maddening, distracting, crappy background music. The arguments that you advance are interesting enough in themselves, so why would any thinking person need this mindless garbage in the background? It makes calm, dispassionate analysis much more difficult. PLEASE cut out the background crap.

  • Philip Goymer
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    So you’re basically arguing for a Daniel Dennett version of compatibilism?
    Also, indeterministic behavior doesn’t add anything to your freedom. Neither indeterminism nor determinism gives you free will. And having the ability to focus to different degrees is also dependent on the kind of person you are that you do not ultimately have control over. Most of the mind 98% is unconscious. Whatever you think you’re doing with your mind is basically the will of the unconscious mind. Can you predict what your next thought will be?
    Not having free will doesn’t take away moral responsibility. The level at which we recognize we don’t have free will is not the level at which morality exists. When we magnify to larger scales at which we think we have free will, that is the level at which morality also exists because it is at this level we have a sense of responsibility and compassion even if at root we do not have the free will to be this way.
    Your discussions about determinism, physicalist, and quantum mechanics are too cut and dry and oversimplify things. Determinism exists at Newtonian scales of matter while indeterminism is fundamental at the quantum scales. There’s a sliding scale of predictability and physical organization (possibility for minds for example) in physics. It’s not like you can just “debunk” determinism because indeterminism is the ultimate reality at the smallest scale. Determinism still exists at larger scales.

  • Stathis Athanasiou
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    Everything you have ever done is a result of how your brain works. The way your brain works is a result of genes and the way your parents raised you. You control none of the two so you cant control how your brain works, therefore you cant control your actions.

  • Frank Nimal
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    The origin of the big bang is a thought. Thoughts are acts of creations. Yes you can choose another's thought and make it your own, or you can create brand new thoughts. The space of thoughts are infinite. This is why they cannot be determined. An infinite source provides infinite possibilities continuously without ever running out. When you say we don't have free will? what is the "we" made from? One must clarify what the "thing" that has or has no free will made from before you can say anything about if it does have free will or not. So the steps for a viable approach is.
    1. What is the definition of free will?
    2. What stuff makes the "thing" that I call me?
    3. Does that stuff permit free will?

    These are my answers to the above
    1. What is the definition of fee will.
    The ability to change space-time 4 dimensionally, that is change past present and future
    2.What stuff makes the "thing" that I call me?
    The thing I call me is a single thing that is made of stuff that can connect simultaneous events as is evident from my ability to see simultaneous event.
    3. Does that stuff permit free will?
    A thing that can connect simultaneous events can operate faster than the speed of light and as such can change past present and future as needed by the definition


  • SozoFlow
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    So… all determinists are nothing more than a bunch of people guilty of strawmen?

  • hendrix4151
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    you are free to choose but your choice results in reward or punishment based on compliance haha..you dont get to change gods standard you can only choose whether you want reward or punishment

  • JustKeith
    Posted at 01:24h, 02 September

    If we have free will, then your god is not all-knowing.