Free Will: In Search of a Definition
by ksiehl
There are few cocepts that are as important in people’s minds as free will. We seem to depend on it both for our own self-esteem–valuing our achievements–as well as for our commitment to a justice system. To say that we lack free will could have potentially devastating consequences for society. And yet, for all its importance, it seems to be quite a mysterious concept.
Everyone knows what free will means, and yet perhaps nobody really understands what free will means. Finding a definition of free will that is both logically self-consistent and testable–at least in principle–is a task that is not as easy as it may seem.
Fermi Society of Philosophy 
Dear Kevin, many thanks for your well-prepared talk!
To facilitate a deeper reflection of various aspects of the free will problem, we have scheduled our next meeting Nov 17 for its open discussion.
For that, I’d like to suggest some questions, which might help to concentrate on the problem and formulate a response. Some of these questions were explicitly highlighted at your talk, other were assumed, the rest might appear as complementary ones. The questions are addressed to each of us, including myself.
Free Will: what does it mean and why is it important?
Why do you care? Isn’t it a pseudo-problem?
If you do care, what is, precisely, the point of your concern?
If your will were totally caused by the laws of nature and QM random chances, could you still consider it free and why?
What is the will which is not free?
If the will and duty are nothing but (partly random biochemical) programs, why ought I sacrifice for the duty?
If your will is not free, can the ethical truth exist for you? If not, how can your duty be supported by reason? Can the human evolution benefit be a sufficient reason to follow a hard duty for you?
Is the ‘free will’ question scientific in principle?
If not, on what ground can it be resolved?