I'd say that people make excuses, and are not to be believed in any case, because they are usually just parroting.

But isn't that what, "I did it of my own free will" means? "I wasn't forced to do it" ? How is that an excuse? In fact it denies there is an excuse, namely having been forced to do it. I am not following you.

It doesn't matter, what people may claim about their actions.
A gang member might claim that he was forced to shoot you because you did not respect him enough.

It's merely excuse-making, and because he is already engaged in forbidden activity, we do not buy it from him - but we do buy it from , for instance, a bank teller ( that she was "forced" to hand over the money).

I would like to pick up the following point, from post #166:


---------- Post added 01-15-2010 at 11:54 PM ----------

And the following, from post #170:



What do the contributors to this thread think about the above points?

But sometimes people are forced to do things they don't want to do. Aren't they?

there are forces..the question relates to an "overwhelming force"..not force such as a light breeze... "forcing" my axe through a person's skull, and not the idea that fear of possible ridicule "forced" me to kill someone who insults me.

I did not know the issue was "overwhelming force". Anyway, I would find the threat of death pretty overwhelming. Wouldn't you?

not necessarily. if it's me or my child, then my child lives at the cost of my life. this kind of demonstration of will, has been seen many many times.

I merely choose the better option .

Right. But how does that mean I chose the lesser of the evils of my own free will? You think that in the novel, Sophie's Choice, that Sophie, the mother, chose one of her children to die of her own free will?

the way I see it, you fail to reason that EVERY action is, ultimately, forced, and yet do reason that some actions are forced.

Why do you think that every action is forced? When I eat a good juicy steak (which I love) why do you think I have been forced to eat that delicious steak? Of course, some actions are forced, and some are not. What is supposed to be the matter with that?

In a sense he is saying, "free will" should be renamed, "limited choice".

Why do you think that every action is forced? When I eat a good juicy steak (which I love) why do you think I have been forced to eat that delicious steak? Of course, some actions are forced, and some are not. What is supposed to be the matter with that?

In a sense he is saying, "free will" should be renamed, "limited choice".

right. unless we want to say that having free will means we can do anything and everything.

---------- Post added 01-16-2010 at 11:18 AM ----------

can you name an action that is not forced ? Walking forward ? No muscular force applied ? Speaking ? No force applied ?

Why? All assertions take place within a context. He is not constrained to eat the steak. Proof: he really wants to eat the steak.

---------- Post added 01-16-2010 at 12:49 PM ----------



Sure, eating a nice juicy steak.

Forces applied by jaws and teeth. Forces applied due to hunger. Forces applied in obtaining the steak too. Forces all over the place from start to finish, including forces on the mind such as being accustomed to eating at certain times and of certain foods.

How can you see any significance of difference between being forced by hunger or imagined needs, vs. being forced by feeling a gun threat or even by feeling an imagined gun threat ? If you hold your hand in your pocket I imagine it is a deadly threat, I am forced to hand over my wallet...

and yet bodily response to hunger is not included in your list of forcings ?

My response to "hand in pocket" was forced but response to lack of food was not ?

But I am talking about forcing people to do things. It is that which is the opposite of free will. I am not talking about forcing my jaws to move and chew. As I said, you are just playing around with words. I don't have free will when I am under compulsion. Not when my jaws are chewing food. My hunger did not force me to eat a steak. It just forced me to eat. I wanted to eat that steak. Believe me, no one, and nothing forced me to eat steak rather than broccoli.

oh. Now you have only a choice between steak and broccoli. I'd choose steak too. I'd be forced to, as broccoli gives me gas. I'd truly be compelled to choose against broccoli by my high regard for fellow elevator riders. Unless in a good breeze in outdoors conditions; then the compulsion to chose against broccoli would be much less, and I do like broccoli.

It's not useful because whatever you decide about will, there is only one useful way to proceed...and that is as if we have will.

Thats right. Free will is one of those hard core common sense notions (Pierce's commonsensism) that everyone assumes in practice even if they deny it in theory. We all assume that we have choices (the ability to do otherwise) and that those choices make a difference.
Everyone presupposes meaningful "free will" in practice even if they deny it in theory. Discussions of free will are useful in clarifying ones notions of will, causality, determinism and other related concepts but in practice (pragmatism) we are all free will advocates.
The same goes for mind independent external reality.