To Restore Freewill We Need to Debunk Not Only Determinism But Also Compatibilism

The Muslim Times’ Chief Editor’s comments It is narrated that someone asked Hazrat Ali, the fourth Caliph of early Islam, “O Imam which of my actions are freewill and which are predestined?” To which Imam replied, “Lift your right leg” the man did it and then he was told “that is freewill.” Then the Imam…

August 20, 2024

3–4 minutes

The Muslim Times’ Chief Editor’s comments

It is narrated that someone asked Hazrat Ali, the fourth Caliph of early Islam, “O Imam which of my actions are freewill and which are predestined?” To which Imam replied, “Lift your right leg” the man did it and then he was told “that is freewill.” Then the Imam said to “lift the other as well.” which obviously the man could not.

The modern rendering of this we get from the philosopher Peter Van Inwagen. He says:

There are certain facts that no human can do anything about — and no human being in history could ever have done anything about. Among these are the fact that the earth is round, the fact that the magnets attract iron, the fact that there were once dinosaurs, and the fact that 317 is a prime number.

These he calls untouchable facts. The untouchable facts are part of predestination or determined in the modern lingo. If freewill exists then there are some touchable facts.

A recent survey of academic philosophers in USA and Canada revealed about their belief in freewill the following demographic information: compatibilism 59.1%; libertarianism 13.7%; no free will 12.2%; other 14.9%.

Only a small proportion of philosophers, which is 13.7% believe in real freewill, which is absolutely necessary for Judaism, Christianity and Islam. There cannot be an accountability or Afterlife without freewill.

The divergent positions of philosophers and their discussions and debates only help to sow doubt in the minds of young believers in colleges and universities. This only helps the cause of lack of belief.

My defense of freewill aims at debunking everything else and it ultimately helps bring us to the best form of theism in the Abrahamic faiths.

Alex O’connor is a good speaker. He is an atheist but I find him as a good resource to tackle compatibilism here and understanding the limits of the Bible in other videos.

A significant majority of the philosophers 59.1% are compatibilist. They want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to subscribe to determinism while paying some lip service to freewill, which is intuitively obvious to every thinking human. I think compatibilism is not a deep-rooted belief but a placeholder to maintain the status quo and justify moral responsibility to keep the justice system in Western societies. A full-throated insistence on hard determinism will bring in a reign of chaos everywhere.

Ultimately, I believe that Quantum mechanics allows for freewill. Not some simplistic understanding that atheists or determinists will insist on, but only when we and other philosophers believe in quantum entanglement and quantum tunneling and insist that it can create universe or even a multiverse from nothing.

In employing Quantum mechanics for defense of freewill, I draw inspiration from Richard Feyman’s saying: “If you think you understand quantum mechanics, then you don’t.” Several other accomplished physicists are on record with similar pithy statements, including Steven Weinburg, 1979 Nobel Laureate during his interview with Richard Dawkins.

The best that I can do right now to say from the mouth of a well known physicist what I want to say about freewill is below:

Generally, I admire Peter Van Inwagen and his theistic views, but here I agree with Alex O’connor’s conclusion in the above video that Inwagen after a great defense for freewill offers an anticlimax towards the end.