We recently discussed Free Will and if it really exists or not. There are five different views broad incompatibilists , semicompatibilists, hard incompatibilists, soft incompatibilists, and soft causalists. Broad incompatibilists think both free will and moral responsibility are incompatible with determinism. Semicompatibilists are narrow compatibilists who are agnostic about free will and determinism but claim moral responsibility is compatible with determinism. Hard incompatibilists think both free will and moral responsibility are not compatible with determinism. Illusionists are incompatibilists who say free will is an illusion. Soft incompatibilists think both free will and moral responsibility are incompatible with strict determinism, but both are compatible with an adequate determinism. Soft causalists are event-causalists who accept causality bu admit some unpredictable events that are cause sui (self0-caused cause) and which start new causal chains.
There are six essential requirements for chance to contribute to libertarian free will.
1) Chance exists in the universe. Quantum mechanics is correct. Indeterminism is true.
2) Chance is important for free will. It breaks the causal chain for determinism.
3)Chance cannot directly cause our actions. We cannot be responsible for random actions.
4) Chance can only generate random unpredictable alternative possibilities for action or thought.
5)Chance, in the form of noise, both quantum and thermal, must be present.
6) Chance must be overcome or suppressed by the adequately determine will when it decides to act, de-liberating the prior free options that “one could have done”.
I think I’m a broad incompatibilists because I think free will and moral responsibility are not compatible with determinism. A person decides what to do with their life and their decisions cannot be determined in advance by earlier circumstances. You can predict someone’s actions based on their past but it’s not definite. Someone can easily change their mind. What are you?