The Importance Of Free Will

Free Will Free will is clearly an ontological issue, but it is rooted in the metaphysical nature of reality. We should study free will because it is theologically significant and because many people assume a particular definition of free will that is incorrect. Studying free will is challenging because it is not defined in Scripture. Further, it is complex because it connects too many other larger theological issues; it intersects with philosophy, historical theology, and systematic theology. At the outset, it is necessary to get a clear understanding of what exactly "free will" is. A being has free will if given all other causal factors in the universe it nevertheless possesses the ability to choose more than one thing. The word freedom
has many other uses political freedom being the foremost among these, but the kind of freedom that I am talking about could be exercised even if a person lay encased in chains, or had a gun aimed at his head. It is the freedom of the mind from causal determination, not the freedom from physical constraints or threats of violence. Free Will is a philosophical term of art for a particular sort of capacity of rational agents to choose a course of action from among various alternatives. Most philosophers suppose that the concept of free will is very closely connected to the concept of moral responsibility. Philosophers who distinguish freedom of action and freedom of will do so because our success in carrying out our ends depends in part on factors wholly beyond our control. The main perceived threats to our freedom of will are various alleged determinisms: physical/causal; psychological; biological; theological. For each variety of determinism, there are philosophers who 1) deny its reality, either because of the existence of free will or on independent grounds, 2) accept its reality but argue for its compatibility with free will, or 3) accept its reality and deny its compatibility with free will. On a minimalist account, free will is the ability to select a course of action as a means of fulfilling some desire.
One reason to deem this insufficient is that it is consistent with the goal-directed behavior of some animals whom we do not suppose to be morally responsible agents. Indeed, it is plausible that they have little by way of a self-conception as an agent with a past and with projects and purposes for the future. Arguments about free will are mostly semantic arguments about definitions. Most experts who deny free will are arguing against peculiar, unscientific versions of the idea, such as that free will means that causality is not involved. These arguments leave untouched the meaning of free will that most people understand which is consciously making choices about what to do in the absence of external coercion, and accepting responsibility for one’s actions. Hardly anyone denies that people engage in logical reasoning and self-control to make
choices. Freewill is the ability to freely choose one of several possible alternatives, to make decisions the outcome of which is and cannot be known in advance.
Choice is an action, so there has to be an actor. Our mind - the totality of our mental processes, does the choosing. In particular, it is that aspect of our mind that is aware of the "self" that recognizes and monitors freewill choices. We choose to think or not, what to think about, how much and how long to concentrate on an issue, how many options to consider, which of the options to select, etc. We also make higher level choices of goals and values, such as desirable character traits, careers, friends and lovers, and of course, moral decisions such as when to lie or tell the truth. Freewill comprises conscious choices only. By definition, freewill pertains to choices that we can monitor and influence, and therefore must exclude subconscious and unconscious choices. This does not mean that such unaware choices are ultimately beyond our control - beyond freewill - but only that they must be controlled indirectly. We can control them through explicit change of values and beliefs, and through conscious modification of
habits. Some theorists are much impressed by cases of inner, psychological compulsion and define freedom of will in contrast to this phenomenon. For such thinkers, true freedom of the will involves liberation from the tyranny of base desires and acquisition of desires for the Good. Plato, for example, posits rational, spirited, and appetitive aspects to the soul and holds that willing issue from the higher, rational part alone. In other cases, one is dominated by the irrational desires of the two lower parts. This is particularly characteristic of those working in a theological context, and those influenced by him on this point. Conclusion, The freedom in freewill is the glorious ability of our minds to reprogram themselves and to evaluate automatic thoughts and emotions. We all have this ability, and we all choose to utilize it to a greater or lesser degree. The effects of nature, nurture, random events, and past decisions are not eliminated, but can be modified by our ability to project consequences and by our power to influence choices - by our awareness of freewill itself. All of this abstract thinking, projecting and deciding is the product of mechanistic causation, determined but not determinable. It is this freedom that makes us human.