Free Will

The question of free will is essentially about what it means to have free will. Does free will mean the freedom to do what you want? That depends on societal (external) constraints. However, free will should be an inner phenomenon.

Free will can be defined as the ability to choose. But to choose what? If we choose what we want, we are simply applying our desires to the world. Perhaps it means choosing whether to act on our desires.

This choice, in fact any choice, must be based on something; otherwise, it is random and not a true choice. Your choices are limited to the information you have access to, compared to all possible information.

To simplify, let’s denote the sum of all the information you have as A, the decision-making entity as Y, and the occurrence of a choice, indicating free will, as FW. The statement "you made a choice based on something, therefore free will exists" can be formulated as:

A × Y = FW

For FW to be true, A and Y must be distinct (A ≠ Y). Otherwise, A = FW, implying free will is merely the sum of all the information you have, which does not constitute free will.

We assume A is true. But what about You (Y)? You know you exist because you think (you have a soul), which is logically consistent. Therefore, You (Y) are true.

To establish free will (FW), we must furthermore prove that You (Y) are not just the sum of all the information you have (A).

You are also your genetics (G). Although genetics are information, they are distinct from A. So, we can say:

A × G = FW

However, this also means unless You (Y) are more than A × G, we get:

Y = FW

If Y equals FW, then you are free will, unless You are more than A × G. If you are not, then free will must be false, or You must be more than A × G. But there is nothing else that could be part of You. And even if another part were identified, we would still conclude: Y = FW. This is because You are everything you are; there isn't more to you than what you are. You can therefore base your decisions on nothing else but You.

Thus, we cannot establish free will this way. Another option is to say free will is choosing who you are. But this choice cannot be based on the information you have, as that is part of who you are. This leaves only the information you don't have, which you cannot access. Therefore, a choice based on nothing is random and not a true choice.

Given this analysis, I must conclude that free will does not exist and is logically inconsistent. This does not mean definitions of free will cannot exist that are logically consistent. Some definitions do exist, but they differ significantly from the common understanding of free will.