The Slave or Master to one’s fate?

My query into this question stems from the central dogmatic questioning of sequential order in this world; is the world pre-determined or do we have free will.

I shall elaborate; if you believe that every action in your life is determined by a process or action prior to that momentary causation. This is known as pre-determinism. On the opposing end of the spectrum, if you believe that every action we partake in or carry out has its independent causation to it then you believe in free will.

I would advise you to spare a moment to think before you decide on your answer.

To begin, we can use rational deductive reasoning to justify the position of pre-determinism. There are a few things in this world that are inherently true to our human senses and rationale such as math and language; for example, “A” is followed by “B” and subsequently followed by “C”. This is an irrefutable axiom, carrying over this same train of thought we can apply this to life. At this current moment, I am writing this article which we can label as C, C was determined by the idea in my head which can be labelled as B, this idea in my head was inspired by material that I had previously examined which we can label as A.

Using this rationale that after A is B and after B is C we can also determine that after C is D, conversely meaning that D was pre-determined by C. Of course this does sound like large leaps from one process to another, so using the basis of reason we can utilise science to justify this stance as well. The process of me writing this article is determined by my fingers moving to type which is determined by muscular reflexes which are in turn are determined by neural impulses which are determined by specific past experiences, this can all be led back to the point of my birth which can be led back to the first fish to walk and even further led back to the Big Bang (Just…). I shan’t bore down to the extreme minor details but this is one of the justifications for pre-determinism.

When I came to accept this perspective, my first thought was that since pre-determinism follows the axioms of what precedes and proceeds; it then means that you are bound to your destiny and fate, which I believe are the heavily romanticised counterparts to pre-determinism; romanticism which has its dangers of its own, presents life in optimistic lenses and leads one to love the idea of life’s spontaneity. This idea of pre-determinism has unfortunately reflected itself upon my life and removed certain lenses of romanticism that perpetuate my daily life.

Now onto free will. Free will is commonly defined as the ability for one to exercise their own decisions and formulate their path. It is not to be confused with freedom which is the ability to exercise free will. Free will presents itself in a heavily romanticised perspective with its definitions influenced by religion (God-given free will) and many stories of human struggle. (The oppressed drive for freedom) .

The problem that free will presents is what exactly do we want? Let me elaborate, there is a common scenario that is often presented in this case; you have some cash and would like to deposit it at the bank, thus you believe you have exercised your free will as you do so. If we critically analyse this scenario I can pose a question, why exactly do we choose to save money? The common answer would be to save money and prepare for a rainy day. However, if I present to you the scenario in which you do not need to save money as you will have enough for the rest of your life, would you not choose to spend this money you have with you now?

What this scenario brings forth is the illusion of free will, given the choice, you would spend your money on things that you want but we do understand that the importance of financial literacy and that there are repercussions to not saving. This thus means that when we choose to deposit money into the bank, we have already been limited down in the decision to not follow our desired path. Thus refuting the entire definition of free will that I had previously defined.

Can we argue that we have exercised freedom? Yes and no. Freedom allows the exercise of free will which in this case has not come to its potential fruition, however, where freedom does exist is in the form of conscious thought to compose the idea that could’ve potentially led to the exercising of free will.

My argument stands against the case of free will, I have a strong belief that every single action or motion is pre-determined by a scientific process. However, I do recognise some arguments can be used to dispute pre-determinism.

One argument is the presence of a random number generator; are the numbers generated not presented randomly? My rebuttal would be that this has presented a case of a pseudo-free will, the number indeed in our standard human perspective is random and appears to be, however, this “random” process was determined by an algorithm to even determine this number inherently meaning it was pre-determined.

Another argument is the one that presents chance. If I roll a dice, isn’t each number randomly selected? Well, no. When you roll a dice, a combination of multiple factors results in the presentation of its face. If you threw each dice at the same angle with the same force and with the same amount of air resistance, the dice would land on the same face every single time. The throwing of random dice itself can be determined if we had the capability or effort to measure and quantify these factors. This being said, I believe I have roughly summarised the entirety of pre-determinism.

This leads back to the original question; whether you are master or slave to your own fate. Sad it is to be a slave yet, perhaps it is better to know we are actually slaves and to not act like a master rather than to think you are a master and act above the slave.

This argument is one I particularly enjoy as it often refutes the irrationality that is often held in the air with many other things. My lack of ability to argue for free will leads me to implore you to do me that favour of arguing against me; in which I would only be delighted to hear potential views.

I would like to emphasise that my views do not represent any cooperation or entity. These are no means of an attack on anyone’s right of speech, views, or religion but rather to explore and share my train of thought. I ask not for everything to be taken in strict correctness but rather for you to read or look for other sources to formulate an individual opinion to appropriately discuss and learn.

Bradley Zander.