Q&A 5, Third Answer

Yes, I put three questions on my Q&A.  The debate pitting free will against determinism is one of my favourite subjects in philosophy, and I could not contain my interest to merely two questions.  My last question is: Does indeterminism open up a doorway for the possibility of free will’s existence?

I do not think so, unless the indeterminism is both entirely random and universal.  The concept of free will contradicts all empirical evidence and logic.  It cannot rationally exist within the universe as humanity currently knows it.  In fact, in order for free will to exist the universe would have to operate under entirely different laws.

Thus, in order for free will to exist, not only the matter in the universe but the laws of it as well would have to randomly change.  I do not believe that this is the case.  While the existence of indetermined elements of the physical universe, such as miniscule particles, seems perfectly feasible to me, the nonfixedness of universal laws seems less so.  While fallibility is difficult to deny, it is also rather impractical to use as a basis for further inquiry into epistemology or metaphysics; thus, although I support the concept of fallibility overall, I also take for granted (or perhaps construct) a few base conditions about the nature of reality, for the sake of continuing inquiry and possible benefit, and the laws of physics are some of these.  If I have any access to the actual nature of reality, then the laws of physics seem to me to hold true; either that or everything I have observed is a miraculous coincidence.