How to disprove free will using basic logic

[Plaupius]

IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

Plaupius said:

IIIIITHE1IIIII said:

I would say "no". The fact that there even is a system means that the free will isn't free but is directly dependent on that (unimaginably complex) system.

So, in a way, I guess that the free will has just as much evidence, to support its existence, as God and the flying spaghetti monster, as I see it.

Ok, the problem I have now is that you're not working with your own defition. Basically, you're adding the requirement that free will is a singularity. Again, I'm trying to work based on your definition of free will, and nowhere does it mention singularity (or being separate from matter, either).

Basically, you're arguing that free will must exist at all levels of complexity of the universe, or it doesn't exist at all. My argument is that free will is, for a lack of a better description, a feature of our consciousness, of a system. And that system can be, per your definition, autonomous and independent.

Well, yes. That is the whole point of this thread. I am trying to prove that it does not exist (although that is just as hard to prove as God's existence). In other words, your argument that our free will would be a part of our consciousness falls according to my definition. If it is a part of a materialistic consciousness then it is directly affected by either determined chain-reactions (on atomic levels) or randomized by quantum effects.

I guess you either missunderstood my definition or my definition has changed during my thought-process.

I understand your argument, and I think it is the case of changed definition. So, please, define free will again as you understand it now.

And, just for clarity, I'm not arguing that free will exists or does not exist, as that is totally irrelevant. If you want to prove the free will does not exist, then you have to define it in such a way that you can actually prove it. Your current, outspoken definition does not seem to support proving that.