How to disprove free will using basic logic

[Euphoria14]

IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

Euphoria14 said:

IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

If it is not determined then it has to be random. Otherwise it would be determined!

Why can't it just be that those "random acts" were in fact acts of free will? Why can't it be that those 'determined" acts were also acts of free will?

To me it just sounds like you use something you can grasp an argument around and claiming it as predetermined and everything you have no answer for you simply shrug your shoulders and say "Well, I have no idea, so let's just call it random".

It has to be random if it's not determined, that is the basic logic I'm talking about.

And the free will cannot be random or determined if it wants to remain free.

I think you're stretching to be honest.

Free will sure lets me do some random shit if I so choose. It also allows me to fully think something out before I do it, and just because I think something out extensively today and perform it next week doesn't make next weeks action determined. Yes, it was determined in a sense because I decided on it. It was that free will of mine that brought the idea to light and I did something with it. My free will also allows me to choose whether or not to act on it.

I decide to walk out of work in the next 2 minutes and walking to my car I just decide to freak the fuck out and scream and run like an idiot.

 

Who makes that decision? You do know I can do that if I want to right?