Originally Posted by
PhilosopherStoned
Exactly.
Nobody has answered the question that I posed in the OP about how free will could even exist without a deterministic universe.
And again, we're just arguing over the definition.
Furthermore, I didn't respond to it because he said he wasn't coming back, but DuB's refutation of my thought experiment was silly. Suppose we decide that the girl will choose the latter option with probability .9999... for some number, n, of nines. You can always make it more accurate by adding one more nine to the end. That means it's 1, as I claimed.
As I said before, this experiment assumes that even if we assume the kind of free will in the conventional definition, we can still cook up a situation where the behavior is known in advance, just like in deterministic free will. So it's silly to say that something being determined in advance ruins free will. The whole argument just falls on its face.
Everything that you can do with your definition of free will, you can do with mine. It's just that mine doesn't depend on some stupid idea that doesn't exist. I don't understand what the problem is.