Do we have "free will"? Yes! Thanks to our personal identity.

Explaining the Problem

In order for us to make sense of the world and ourselves, it is necessary that we establish a relation of cause and effect between events. Not only do we need this relationship to make sense of perception, but we need it to make sense of our decisions, intentions, and thoughts. Think about it for a minute. If you couldn't ask "why?", and give what you felt was a relatively accurate reason for the event in question, then you would be quite lost and possibly insane. Why are you reading this blog (answer: because [insert cause or reason here])? How did you come to own a computer? How did that computer come to exist? Why do you like or dislike some things? Why do you find one argument more compelling than another? The answer to these questions reveal the causes behind them. Sometimes these causes are stated as reasons which you've come to understand by means of other causes, and those causes by infinitely more causes.  Now imagine freezing time and tracing back all causes that led to you reading this blog...

The dilemma thus reveals itself: It appears that everything you've done and thought up to this point, was not your choice or by your own free will. "Choice" was just an illusion created by your consciousness.  Upon reflecting, It appears your actions and ideas originate not from you, but from external causes leading back before your very birth, and leading back all the way to the creation of the universe.

When we consider your decision to read this blog, the fundamental question is, "could you have done otherwise?" Well, if you agree that there is a cause behind everything, as it appears there is, then all causes leading up to this moment determined your choice, so the answer is no. If this is the case, then you do not appear to have free will. This crisis in philosophy is known as determinism. Not only are you not responsible for your actions because they were determined by external causes, but I also cannot hold you responsible for those actions (and thus the end of morality). But I am not concerned with morality in this particular argument, but rather, whether or not we have free will.

Now, before you start quoting me and commenting vehement objections, let me explain… There is another option.  Instead of assuming causality, we can assert that there is nothing determining our actions, which entails that there are no reasons or external causes leading to our decisions, intentions, or actions. If this were true however, we would thus be acting spontaneously without reason or cause. It appears this venture does not get us free will either. Why? Because free will requires willing our actions, and that implies acting on reasons - in other words *Control*. Spontaneity is not being in control of our actions, and free will requires that we are in control.  Besides, we can't make sense of a world in the absence of order, with no way of establishing relationships between events. And so the paradox continues to elude us.

Solution?

[Substantially Revised]

I believe the problem is in our misinterpretation of "free will." Being "able to have done otherwise" is too restrictive and narrow of a view. To discover if we have free will, lets look at something we know does not have free will. Take a machine or computer for example. It operates by receiving inputs and - according to certain rules - it gives certain outputs. This machine is absolutely determined in every way. In fact, if we had all information about this machine, it is possible to accurately predict every output for every given input. But we can build a computer to simulate human behavior, and we've done so. What are these machines lacking?  They are not self-aware and they are not free to remake the rules that govern their responses. Every time the machine is fed input, it isn't free to reflect on that input or change the rules governing its criterion for output.  We are free to change the rules. Because we are self-aware, with a personal identity, we can reflect on information or experience past actions.  And we can then change the rules by which we react and even think (think about how your political views have changed). While you couldn't have done otherwise than reading this sentence right now, you are free to change the rules that dictated you to read this sentence.

The standard objection:   What of the causal chain leading you to alter the rules which govern inputs and outputs?  My response:  Look at the source.  The personal identity which is self-aware, gives form to the rules.  And thus, "YOU" play a part in the causal history leading toward a decision.