- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Yes, free will is merely the act of choosing between alternatives. But in order for that to be possible it must be the case that alternatives actually exist.
Let's say that free will really is merely the act of choosing between alternatives. That makes free will contingent upon their actually being alternatives, not merely the illusion of alternatives. If it is not in fact possible for someone to take a course of action other than the one they take, then there were no alternatives and what we call a 'choice' in our everyday language is not actually a choice. In order to substantiate the claim that free will is possible, then, it is necessary to show that alternatives actually exist.
In a non-causal universe reasons would not be necessary for action. That you suggest that reasons are necessary undermines the position that free will exist because it makes our actions determined by those reasons rather than independent of them. This is one of the reasons I think compatibilist accounts are incoherent.
That free will does not require the existence of God does not prove that free will is possible.
Why can't unicorns and leprechauns simply exist? For that matter, why can't God just exist? If one makes the claim that something can exist then there is a burden of proof to show that it actually can. You haven't even begun to substantiate a claim that it is possible for free will to exist. You just keep asserting it. That's not a valid form of argument for the very simple reason that it isn't even an argument.
You're begging the question. You effectively just said that because we can choose to act we can choose to act. That doesn't prove anything. However, that we act upon our desires as a matter of fact actually discredits the free will claim because it suggests our desires determine our actions.