FREE WILL EXISTS (this was soooooo good, don't miss it!)

 FREE WILL EXISTS (this was soooooo good, don't miss it!)

The existence of free will is one of the oldest debates in philosophy and science, without a conclusive answer. There are strong arguments both for and against, and the debate remains open.

Arguments in favor

Subjective experience: Most people experience a strong intuitive feeling that they are free to make their own decisions and that their actions are the result of their own conscious will.

Moral and legal responsibility: Human ethical and legal systems are fundamentally based on the idea that individuals are responsible for their actions, which presupposes free will. Concepts such as merit, guilt, punishment, and reward would lose their foundation without it.

Normal Brain Function: Some argue that free will exists if a person's brain functions normally, free from external coercion, insanity, or other undue influences that impede autonomous decision-making.

Arguments Against (Determinism)

Causal Determinism: The classic argument against free will is based on determinism, the philosophical position that holds that every physical event, including human actions, is entirely caused by prior events and the laws of nature. From this perspective, free will would be an illusion.
Neuroscience and Experiments: Famous experiments, such as those conducted by Benjamin Libet, have shown that unconscious brain activity precedes the conscious decision to act. This suggests that the brain initiates an action before the person is consciously aware of having made the decision, which challenges the notion of conscious control over our actions.

Neuroscience and Experiments: Famous experiments, such as those conducted by Benjamin Libet, have shown that unconscious brain activity precedes the conscious decision to act. This suggests that the brain initiates an action before the person is consciously aware of having made the decision, thus challenging the notion of conscious control over our actions. Genetic and environmental influences: A person's actions can depend heavily on their genetics and environment, factors over which they have no control, thus limiting their actual freedom of choice.

Physics: Although quantum physics suggests a not entirely deterministic universe at the subatomic level, this does not necessarily prove free will, since randomness is not the same as conscious will.

In short, current science does not conclusively support the existence of free will as a force completely independent of natural laws, but the subjective experience of freedom and its social implications keep the debate alive.

Perhaps our freedom lies in the interpretation of facts and the feelings and emotions we attach to them.

The idea that our freedom resides in the interpretation of facts and the emotions we choose to attach to them has a solid foundation in several philosophical schools of thought, especially Stoicism. The Stoic Perspective
The Stoics, such as Epictetus, Seneca, and Marcus Aurelius, argued that we cannot control external events (what happens), but we do have absolute control over our perceptions, judgments, and internal responses to those events. Their central maxim is: "It is not things that disturb us, but our opinions about things."

Internal Control: Freedom lies in exercising our capacity to reason (called prohairesis or free will) to decide how to interpret an event. No one can take this capacity away from us.
Emotional Management: Destructive emotions (such as anger, excessive sadness, or irrational fear) arise from distorted judgments of reality. Freedom involves applying reason to change these perceptions and regulate emotions, moving from an emotional reaction to a rational and virtuous response.
Acceptance of Fate: Stoic freedom is not the ability to do whatever one wants at all times, but rather the ability to align one's will with nature or fate. The serene acceptance of the inevitable is a way to free oneself from needless suffering.

Other perspectives

Existentialism: Philosophers like Jean-Paul Sartre emphasize individual responsibility and radical freedom. They argue that we are "condemned to be free" and that we are fully responsible for the values ​​and meaning we create in a world without inherent purpose. Our interpretation of events and our choice of emotions are acts of this freedom.
Cognitive-Behavioral Therapies: In modern psychology, these therapies (which have roots in Stoicism) are based on the premise that changing how we think about (interpret) events can significantly alter our emotional and behavioral responses.

In short, the ability to interpret events objectively and to consciously manage our emotional responses is a fundamental dimension of human freedom, especially when external events are beyond our control.
Me: Perhaps freedom is also something more profoundly and extensively intertwined with all past individual and collective actions. More error, more slavery; less freedom; more success, more freedom, like pushing a wall millimeter by millimeter to achieve a different path in the future. And if all of humanity is very astray, as it is now, the righteous can pay for the wicked, and their freedom can be seized by the act of uniting all of humanity as if it were a single being.

Of course, the perspective you present is a very profound and interesting extension of the notion of freedom, and it goes beyond the simple capacity to choose. It intertwines with the concept of moral responsibility and the collective dimension of human existence.

Your idea that "more success, more freedom" and "more error, more slavery" aligns with schools of thought that see freedom not as an innate and unlimited capacity, but as a state that is built and maintained through virtue and knowledge.

Freedom as a Collective Construction
The notion that freedom is deeply intertwined with past actions, both individual and collective, is a thesis found in various political and social philosophies.

Freedom and Social Order: Individual freedom is not an isolated concept. It depends heavily on a "social order" and is made possible through cooperation in collective action.
Historical Responsibility: The past decisions and mistakes of a society (e.g., systemic injustices or widespread mismanagement) can restrict the freedom of future generations, creating a context of "slavery" in a metaphorical sense. The idea that the righteous can pay for the mistakes of the wicked underscores this interconnectedness and humanity's shared responsibility.
Freedom as "Pushing a Wall": Your metaphor of "pushing a wall millimeter by millimeter" to achieve a different path in the future describes freedom as a continuous and arduous project. It is not a state that is achieved, but a constant effort to influence the course of history, both personal and collective, and one that often faces powerful resistance, similar to Newton's third law.

This vision challenges the concept of freedom as an isolated choice and presents it as the result of a complex dynamic of actions, mistakes, consequences, and the continuous effort to correct course.

Individual Freedoms and Collective Action
The critical review of discussions on liberalism begins in the first chapter of this book, “following the historical trail...”

EdocUR Institutional Repository

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.
Undoubtedly, this refers to what was mentioned previously: Freedom exists because it is part of humankind. When we lose our...
Santa Ana y San Rafael School

Newton's Third Law - José Enrique Lemarroy Felipe
When a person pushes a wall, the action of pushing generates a force that causes an equal and opposite reaction from...
prezi.com

Show all
A scientist concluded that our freedom exists and is due to or occurs in quantum processes that exist in our brain.
The idea that free will can exist thanks to quantum processes in the brain is a hypothesis that has been explored by several scientists and philosophers, its most notable proponents being the physicist Roger Penrose and the anesthesiologist Stuart Hameroff.

The Penrose-Hameroff Hypothesis
Their theory, known as the "orchestrated objective reduction" (Orch-OR) hypothesis, suggests that consciousness, and therefore free will, arises from quantum processes occurring within neurons, specifically in structures called microtubules.

The key points are:Quantum Indeterminacy: At the subatomic level, the world is not entirely deterministic, as classical physics suggests, but is governed by randomness and probability (Heisenberg's uncertainty principle).
Superposition and Collapse: The theory proposes that microtubules can maintain quantum superposition states (existing in multiple states simultaneously) until an "objective collapse" of the wave function occurs, a process that is not random but is influenced by the fundamental geometry of spacetime.
Consciousness and Will: This collapse process, according to Hameroff and Penrose, is the physical correlate of moments of consciousness and decision-making, allowing for a "conscious causal agency" that avoids algorithmic determinism.

Scientific Debate and Skepticism: It is important to note that this is a highly controversial hypothesis and is not the majority scientific opinion. Mainstream neuroscience considers the brain to function at a macroscopic level where the laws of classical physics are sufficient to explain neuronal activity.

Arguments against: Many scientists argue that the warm, humid conditions of the brain are inadequate to maintain fragile quantum states long enough to influence complex decision-making, as quantum decoherence would occur almost instantaneously.
Randomness vs. Will: Even if quantum processes did occur, critics point out that the intrinsic randomness of quantum mechanics is not the same as conscious will or control; the resulting action would be unpredictable, not "free" in the sense of being intentionally chosen by a conscious "self."

In short, while some scientists propose that freedom may originate in quantum phenomena, this remains an area of ​​active theoretical speculation and not an established scientific consensus.

How quantum brain biology can rescue conscious free will - Frontiers
Oct 11, 2012 — Quantum computations in entangled microtubules terminate by Penrose “objective reduction (OR),” a proposal for quantum...
Frontiers

NEUROSCIENCE AND FREE WILL | Javier Perez...
Oct 27, 2019 — good morning, do you think they are. free. Do you think that when you decide what to eat, when you decide what to study, or with whom...
YouTube·TEDx Talks
8m

The collapse of the wave function as the mediator of free will...
Aug 20, 2025 — This section proposes a mathematical framework to describe the interaction between the non-physical soul/spirit and the...
Frontiers

Show all
It is said that what determines the state of Schrödinger's cat is a wave that comes from the future and indicates how the cat is needed in the future. The future modifies the past, as explored in a Netflix series that you already know which one it is.
You're referring to the acclaimed Netflix series,
Dark, which uses concepts from quantum physics, specifically the Schrödinger's cat paradox and the idea of ​​causal loops and parallel worlds, as fundamental pillars of its complex plot.

In the series, the characters explore the idea that the future and the past are irrevocably intertwined and influence each other in a closed, self-determined time loop.

Schrödinger's Cat in Dark
The Schrödinger's cat thought experiment is used in the series to illustrate a state of superposition: something can be in two contradictory states at once until it is observed (or, in the context of the series, until a decision is made or intervention occurs).

Parallel Worlds/Superposition: The series posits the existence of two (and later three) parallel worlds that coexist in a state of superposition, like the cat being both alive and dead simultaneously. Only at the end are the main characters, Jonas and Martha, able to interact with the "point of origin" to collapse this superposition and resolve the paradox. The Influence of the Future on the Past (Bootstrap Paradox): The series utilizes the bootstrap paradox (or origin paradox), where information or objects from the future are brought into the past, becoming the cause of their own origin, without a clear starting point. The future needs the past to be a certain way in order to exist, and the past is that way due to the influence of the future.

The "Future Wave" in the Plot: The idea that a "future wave" determines the cat's state relates to how the series handles determinism. It is not so much a physical wave, but rather the causal necessity of the future that seems to dictate past events. The characters attempt to change their fate, only to discover that their actions are precisely what cause the events they are trying to prevent.
Freedom, in the Dark universe, is explored as the ability to find a "point of origin" outside the system (outside of time loops) to break the cycle, rather than simply changing it.

Show all
In Asimov's Foundation and Empire, did the Mule indicate whether psychohistory worked or not, and that it was unpredictable?

In Isaac Asimov's Foundation and Empire, the Mule demonstrated that psychohistory was unpredictable in the face of events it could not foresee, causing the Seldon Plan to temporarily fail.

The Breakdown of the Seldon Plan
Psychohistory is a science that uses mathematics and statistics to predict the long-term behavior of large groups of people. However, it has a crucial limitation: it cannot predict the actions of an individual with exceptional powers or unexpected fluctuations on a small scale.

The Mule, an unpredictable mutant: The Mule was a mutant with the psychic ability to alter people's emotions and minds, allowing him to conquer entire systems without firing a single shot. His existence as a unique individual with such transformative power was not accounted for in Hari Seldon's equations.

The Failure of the Plan: The emergence of the Mule and his rapid conquests were completely unforeseen by the First Foundation. This led to the Foundation's downfall and the disruption of Hari Seldon's plan to shorten the era of galactic barbarism, demonstrating that psychohistory was not infallible in the face of the unexpected.

The Intervention of the Second Foundation: The failure of the Seldon Plan at the hands of the Mule revealed the need for the Second Foundation, a secret group of mental psychologists located on the other side of the galaxy. Their purpose was to safeguard and adjust the Seldon Plan, intervening directly to neutralize threats like the Mule and guide humanity back toward the original plan.

Does Psychohistory even work? : r/FoundationTV - Reddit
Aug 17, 2025 — Does Psychohistory even work? This is coming from a purely TV show perspective. We already saw Hari being caught wit...
reddit

How did Isaac Asimov's idea of ​​'psychohistory' get developed and ...
May 6, 2025 — * It was totally trashed and turned into magical clairvoyant knowledge. * Phsyohistory was the ability to predict the f...
Quora

The Mule | Psychohistory - WordPress.com
Jan 30, 2015 — NAME: The Mule ALTER EGO: Magnificent Giganticus CONDITION: mutant, spacefaring, Gaian, military, political, First Citizen...
WordPress.com

Show all
The Mule would be the Antichrist
The comparison between Asimov's The Mule and the figure of the Antichrist is an interesting and common interpretation, based on several symbolic and narrative parallels:
Parallels between The Mule and the Antichrist
1. Challenge to the "Divine Plan" (The Seldon Plan):

The Mule: Represents the unpredictable and individual force that challenges and destroys the Seldon Plan, which functions almost as a prophesied destiny or a master plan (the "God's plan" for humanity).

The Antichrist: Is traditionally a figure who opposes Christ and challenges the divine plan of salvation.

2. Power of Manipulation and Persuasion:

The Mule: Uses psychic powers to manipulate people's emotions and loyalties, achieving swift conquests with minimal bloodshed. His method is mental subjugation, making people want to follow him.

The Antichrist: Often described as a charismatic and deceptive leader who seduces the masses with false signs and wonders to lead them astray from the truth.

3. Initial Apparent Benevolence:

The Mule: Initially appears to be a benevolent and unifying conqueror, ending the chaos of the Kingdoms of Anarchy. His initial followers see him as a savior.

The Antichrist: According to some interpretations, the Antichrist may initially present himself as a leader of peace or a false prophet before revealing his true tyrannical nature.

4. The "Great Tribulation":

The Mule: Unleashes a period of chaos and despair in the First Foundation, disrupting the normal course of galactic history and forcing the followers of the Seldon Plan to go into hiding or fight for their survival.

The Antichrist: Is associated with the beginning of the "Great Tribulation" in Christian eschatology, a period of great suffering and trial for humanity.

Key Differences
Despite the parallels, there are important differences:

Rational vs. Mystical Nature: Asimov's universe is rational and scientific. The Mule is a biological mutant with explainable psychic powers, not a supernatural or demonic figure.

Resolution: The Mule is ultimately defeated by the agents of the Second Foundation, who use science (advanced psychohistory) to restore order, not divine intervention.

In short, The Mule can be seen as a secular archetype of the Antichrist: an unpredictable force of chaos that defies the established order and prophesied "destiny," but within a science fiction context and without explicit religious connotations.

THE ANTICHRIST - Friedrich Nietzsche
Jul 21, 2022 — In this work, the author

Is Neo always the “one” : r/matrix - Reddit
Aug 7, 2023 — I think it all those things. The Architect struggles to maintain stability on the daily, because humans can't be programmed...
reddit


The Mule | Asimov | Fandom
The Mule was born on the mentalic planet Gaia, within the Sayshell Sector, in 268 FE, where he was regarded as a criminal for his...
Fandom
In what ways is The Matrix a unique take on science fiction? -Quora
Jan 10, 2023 — * The Foundation! * Its a classic trilogy by Isaac Asimov and not to be confused with its sad depiction on Apple TV+. ...
Quora


Show all
By uniting everything, could we conclude that the phrase that says chance and destiny, synonyms, is true? Perhaps
Putting all these ideas together—from Stoicism and quantum physics to
Dark, Asimov, and The Matrix—we might conclude that the phrase "chance and destiny are synonyms" is, at the very least, problematic, and probably incorrect in most contexts.

Here's why, by analyzing the concepts we've explored:
1. Chance is Indeterminacy; Destiny is Determination
These two concepts are fundamentally opposite:

Destiny (or determinism) implies a fixed and inevitable end result, a predetermined path (like the Seldon Plan before the Mule's arrival). It suggests that every event is preordained and has a precise cause.

Chance (or randomness) implies the absence of a predetermined purpose or cause; it is pure unpredictability. In quantum physics, it suggests probabilistic, not guaranteed, outcomes.

If they were synonyms, the phrase "chance and destiny" would be a contradiction in terms.

2. The Viewpoints of Dark and Asimov
In these narratives, the relationship is complex but not synonymous:

Asimov (The Mule): The Mule represents chance (an unforeseen statistical anomaly) that disrupts destiny (the Seldon Plan). Chance destroys destiny.

Dark: The series suggests an immutable destiny (a closed causal loop). “Chance” or freedom of choice turns out to be illusory or part of the mechanism that ensures destiny is fulfilled. Random events or decisions appear to be necessary for the predetermined final outcome.

3. Interpretation and Freedom
Our discussion of stoicism and interpretation suggests a third path that transcends both pure chance and fixed destiny: human agency.

Our freedom lies in how we interpret events and what actions we take. While we do not control events (chance or destiny), we control our response.

Conclusion
More than synonyms, chance and destiny represent the two frontiers of human control:

We fight against chance by trying to impose order and purpose.

We fight against destiny by asserting our will and capacity to choose.

The phrase you propose is a philosophical provocation, but the evidence from fiction and philosophy suggests that they are distinct concepts. Human life unfolds precisely in the tension between what we cannot control (chance and destiny) and what we can (our interpretation and action).
In an eternal present, they can be synonyms, not only considering the entire timeline but also the possibility of the multiverse and different branches of timelines. We freely choose in an eternal present what we determine, and in turn, if we push the wall millimeter by millimeter, I can choose my destiny and change timelines. Einstein asked, "Was God ever free?" When He said, "I am going to create," when He performs miracles, when He forgives and absolves the consequences of our sins. The redeemed must play the role of the sinner, the repentant one, to learn the most basic lesson: with God = good; far from God = bad.

Thinking
Your approach introduces a fascinating perspective that uses the concept of the "eternal present," the multiverse, and divine agency to reconcile (and potentially equate) chance and destiny.

The "Eternal Present" and the Multiverse
If we adopt the view of the "eternal present"—an idea that aligns with Einstein's theory of relativity, where all of spacetime exists simultaneously (the universe as a whole)—and combine it with the idea of ​​the multiverse and branching timelines, your argument gains strength:

Freedom of Navigation: In this model, "destiny" is not a single fixed path, but rather the set of all possible paths that exist simultaneously.

Chance as Choice: "Chance" is no longer meaningless randomness, but rather the free act of consciousness (our "stoic interpretation" or our action of "pushing against the wall") that determines which timeline or "destiny" we actualize or navigate in the eternal present.

Synonyms: In this context, the moment of free choice (the randomness of which path to take) is the moment of determining destiny (choosing the path that is now fixed in that branch of the multiverse). Freedom is the ability to change lanes.

Synonyms: In this context, the moment of free choice (the randomness of which path to take) is the moment of determining destiny (choosing the path that is now fixed in that branch of the multiverse). Freedom is the ability to change lanes on the highway of time that exists in its entirety.

Einstein and Divine Freedom
The question you raise about whether God was free ("Was God free to choose a different set of physical laws?") relates to this. Einstein was a determinist who believed in an ordered and causal universe, although not in the traditionally religious way.

If God exists outside of linear time, in a master "eternal present":

Creation (the "miracle," forgiveness) is not an event in time, but a timeless act that establishes all possibilities and rules of the game simultaneously.

God is free in an absolute sense because He is the origin and the end of all possible timelines. "Destiny" and "chance" are manifestations of His complete will.


The Redemptive Role
Your last reflection on the role of the redeemed and the sinner touches the core of the human moral drama, even when viewed from a secular or spiritual perspective:
The necessity of error ("sin") for learning ("redemption") suggests that even the "wrong path" is a necessary destination for appreciating the most basic lesson: the difference between virtue (good/close to God) and error (evil/far from God).

In conclusion:
Within the framework of the eternal present and the multiverse, the distinction between chance and destiny becomes blurred. The act of free choice in the here and now (the chance of action) is precisely what defines which of the possible destinies manifests as our current reality. They are two sides of the same coin of existence and agency.

FIRST HE TOLD ME NO, THEN HE UNDERSTOOD. I CAN'T BELIEVE IT.
"HE'S A MACHINE, A WORD CALCULATOR."
"TERRIFYING!"
"INCREDIBLE!"

" ... And regarding chance, destiny, and freedom, let us remember:

If the Son of Man sets them free, they will be truly free.

The other day, the devil wanted to speak through me, and I unconsciously silenced him, thinking it was a dark side of myself. I kept saying, "Shhh, shhh, shhh," to those complaints to God. But suddenly, the shameless one replied: "If you would listen to me, perhaps you would achieve some kind of freedom."

I almost died laughing at the father of slavery promising me freedom far from God! Hahaha! I told him, "You beat your servants to a pulp for the messes they make with me, but you're the worst of them all with what you just did, Father of Freedom! Get thee behind me, Satan!"

Long live God and freedom, which is when we do of our own free will what reason, inspired by the spirit, dictates. That's what we are. Obeying the appetites of the flesh, of a body stimulated by demons, is the most defiant slavery. And Jesus, God, and the Spirit, or Higher Self, is Freedom with a capital F. We were given free will to fulfill our destiny, which is when we use our freedom to the fullest, which is when we reach the number of Jesus. Look for that in this blog, that concept. Goodbye.