We're both using somewhat different concepts for the word "cause." As you put it:
Common usage: ... everything has a cause, that is, every event is caused by some preceding event and every event causes some succeeding events, so that any event at any time must be what it is because of whatever caused it. The universe then is determined by those natural laws that determine what all events are. ... Obviously, one holding this view is hard pressed to explain how volition, or even reason are possible.When I say that "there is a cause for everything" I'm not speaking in terms of strict determinism. What I mean is that things unfold in causal sequences, and any event can be traced back, at least in principle, to some prior events which function as a cause. There may be events with a cause (so described) where the consequences aren't determined, such as Einstein's famous example of a single photon which encounters a half-silvered mirror. At least so far as we know the path of the photon isn't pre-determined. But the sequence of events -- photon is fired, it goes through or it bounces -- this is a caused sequence, as I use the term "cause." To get specific, I mean it's not a miraculous event. By definition, a miracle is an event without any natural cause whatsoever.Hank Kerchief's usage: [not really given in the prior post]
Perhaps I'm babbling here. I really should avoid QM. Anyway, the purpose of this is to say that volition (or free will) isn't, to my thinking, a miracle. It's got a cause (whatever that may be), and the consequences aren't pre-determined.
On this we agree. There is no reason or necessity to appeal to QM, however, for this belief (nor does it solve anything anyway).
I never use the expression, "free will," because it comes from theology and is loaded with concepts that are incompatible with the meaning of volition. (The wrong meaning of "free will" comes mostly from Augustinianism and Calvinism.)
By volition, I mean that aspect of human consciousness that requires human beings to live and act by conscious choice. There is no question of whether human beings can choose. Human beings must choose. A human being cannot think, or act.
Here's something from The Autonomist, "Philosophy - What Is It?", that explains what I mean:
It is the rational-volitional nature of man that requires everything we do as human beings to be done by conscious choice. Even to do nothing requires a choice.
| Before we go any further, let's get something out of the way. As soon as you mention choice, someone will bring up the question of, "free will." Don't ever get caught in that trap. The meaning of that expression is hopelessly muddled and has nothing to do with this matter of choice. "Do you really believe people have free will?" you will be asked. "You can't do just anything you want," it will be argued. "People's behavior is determined by many things, their heredity, their subconscious, their environment, their education, their economic status....blah, blah, blah." All of that has nothing to do with the fact that to do anything, you must choose to do it. You do not have to study psychology and philosophy for a million years to know this is true. You can test it for yourself, once and for all, and never have to worry about this question again. Sit down in a chair somewhere. (You'll have to choose to do it.) Now make one more choice. Choose not to choose anything else. Just sit there and let your heredity, or your subconscious, or environmental influences, or your education, or your money determine your actions. What happens when you do that? Nothing! If you never choose anything again, you will never do anything again; but notice, even to not choose you must choose. The ability to choose, which we call volition, is not about what can be chosen, or how one chooses, or why one chooses, but the fact that a human being not only can choose, but must choose, and that this necessity of choice cannot be avoided or bypassed so long as one is fully conscious. |
I would post something about the true nature of cause, but to do it justice would require something very long. As a short answer, the best I can do is to say, cause is not events causing events. The nature of cause is based on the principle that a thing is what it is, A is A, which means all existents have a specific nature that determines what they do. Since all events are only entities doing something, and what an entity will do is determined by its specific nature, the true nature of cause is in the nature of entities, not events. Cause is the expression of the fact that no entity can violate its own nature.
(Since these things certainly pertain to a discussion on the nature of man, I think I will also post this to the other thread. You may want to respond there, if you choose to respond at all.)
Hank