Introduction

Arguably, no struggle for freedom in which humanity has engaged approaches the scope and intensity of that of determining its own, intrinsic freedom. That mankind is equipped with an inalienable power of free will, or that the concept is something of a delusional mechanism or unrealistic aspiration, has occupied the minds of philosophers and ordinary men and women since the advent of recorded thought.

Proponents of strict determinism, who aver that free will is an attractive but unobtainable concept, have a great deal of weight on their side, as will be presented. Long before Newtonian physics strengthened the proposition that all action is essentially reactive, Eastern and Western philosophies have pointed to the seemingly inextricable factors of sheer circumstance as dictating what people “choose” to do, and/or how they elect to behave and live. Components both pragmatic and intangible combine in every individual’s existence, rendering the ostensibly isolated element of free will the debatable essence it is.

What such thinking overlooks, or unjustifiably discounts, is that free will validates its existence by the simple fact that it is perpetually offered, and looked for, as a reality. As evidenced by thousands of years of history, mankind is indefatigable in its pursuit of it, either as a potential not yet fully achieved or as a commodity within human beings distinctly in use. Opposed or fervently supported, free will is irrefutably desired. A concept so omnipresent and persistent in philosophical debate cannot be purely speculative, by virtue of the awareness of its existence that speculation confirms. Free will is indeed a living element of the human psyche, and this cannot be otherwise because humanity insists upon its presence and has an undeniable awareness of its existence.

Foundation of Argument

The strongest asset in asserting the existence of free will is derived, ironically, from the opposing camp, at least in a sense. That is to say, those who refute free will do so typically through a narrowing of the definition of the term, which obfuscates the inherent meaning of it.

There is precedent for such dilemmas within the arenas of philosophy. For instance, conceptions of virtue have been, and are, as hotly contested as is free will, and usually because the virtue in question is imbued with different meanings by the concerned parties. There are the more observable forms of virtue, such as kindnesses performed and concrete actions prompted by ethics, and there is the less identifiable aspect or state of being of virtue as an innate, formless, and fixed instinct for a general correctness, or goodness. These are, essentially, distinctly different entities, and no real examination of virtue in philosophical terms may be conducted without a focus on the latter.

So, too, is free will subject to “subjectivity”. That is, it is rather easily disputed when the free will in question is perceived as a complete freedom of choice. Clearly, even the most ardent adherent of free will must concede that human behavior is maintained within certain parameters:

“Of course if our will is free it is still responsible to considerations – considerations which weigh with us and which are not open to choice in the course of our deliberations” (Dilman 6). For a serious evaluation of free will, it is essential that it be understood to be an agent which, while necessarily influenced by circumstance, nonetheless exists independently of such.

If, then, it is accepted that free will exists apart from external circumstances, the issue arises of identifying a thing ordinarily known by its borders. This has always been the great difficulty for free will proponents, as the essence is intrinsically imperceptible. Virtue may be seen as such when an innate feeling of satisfaction accompanies its presence; goodness is felt on a visceral level, and this is – rightly – taken as evidence of the thing itself. Free will leaves no such trail behind it. Like change, it is neither good nor bad; it is a channel or a path, and not a purpose or destination.

How, then, to validate it? Moreover, the seemingly insurmountable difficulty of self-knowledge comes into play, for it is likely that many instances wherein free will is believed to be exercised are actually cases of unseen and unknown causal influences at play. Daily life, as well as history itself, is replete with individuals who have fully believed that their will was the paramount, deciding factor in a situation, when even moderate detective work reveals a chain of cause and effect.

…