As with Feynman's Physicists' History of Physics, airtight historical accuracy is not intended or relevant. This is a story about ideas, not really a history.
Once upon a time there were people. And then there were children and Judaism. After a few generations, a wise rabbi noticed that some adults are bad people, like murderers or pagans, and others were good people, like fellow rabbis, blacksmiths, or moneylenders.
And he noticed that as young children he couldn't see any critical difference in people. He couldn't predict who would turn out good, and who would turn out bad. He guessed that whether a child would be a good or bad person as an adult was not yet determined when they were still a child.
He tried preaching to people. He told them about how to be good people. He found very little success preaching to bad adults, but he found that in a controlled, double blind study the children he preached to turned out to be good adults at a much higher rate than children in a pagan control group.
And thus our Rabbi determined that human actions play a role in whether children grow up to be virtuous or wicked. But he wanted to help everyone, and some of the children he helped still turned out badly. What was going on? He needed an explanation.
He came up with the explanation that it is within a person's power to turn out either way, and they are able to choose which way they want to be. He found that the world made more sense taking into account this explanation. He found the explanation helped him and did not create any worse problems than he had before. He concluded that the explanation, while it may not be perfect, had content. There was something good about it.
Over the generations the idea of free will was refined. For example, people noticed that adults sometimes can make choices and change themselves. And they noticed that people get more than one choice in their whole life. And they noticed that the concept can be applied to simple things like "choosing" a flavor of ice cream. They also noticed that it sometimes may not apply; they noticed factors that can make it hard to choose; and they noticed factors that reliably make most exposed people turn out in a certain way.
Eventually, by the year 2008, the general understanding of free will was quite a bit better than the original, including the understanding of what is and is not an exception. Progress had been made.
If someone wants to say that free will is a bad concept, he needs to tell a better story. He needs to solve the same problems in a better way. If he wants to replace this story with nothing at all, that is a revolutionary, anti-Popperian approach which is inconsistent with the steady growth of knowledge. We need improved ideas that do a better job of solving our problems. We don't need a bunch of logicians to go on a rampage throwing out any ideas they don't understand well enough to justify, and leaving us to find new solutions from scratch.
Is determinism a viable option for a different explanation?
What story does 'determinism' tell that explains things better? AFAIK determinism doesn't explain why anyone is how they are, it just says that they can't do anything to stop it. But I refused to believe that and I've tried to take lots of steps to improve my own life (some more successful than others). What story does determinism tell about the things I did which other ppl didn't do? Or what does determinism say about why I was different to other ppl and took the particular steps I did while they took other steps or didn't take any at all?
What story does determinism tell that's different to "you don't need a story, people are how they are and you can't do anything about it so don't worry"?
> What story does determinism tell that's different to "you don't need a story, people are how they are and you can't do anything about it so don't worry"?
There are events outside your control. These can be in the external world and also in your internal world.
For an example of the external world. If you never encountered chocolate ice cream. Chocolate wouldn't be your favorite flavor ice cream. Even though if you did encounter chocolate ice cream it would be your favorite. So you have to have the luck of discovering chocolate ice cream for you to know it's your favorite. (This is poorly worded but I can't make it better for now.)
For the internal world. You don't get to choose what your favorite flavor ice cream is. You will prefer one over another and you can't control that.
What I'm trying to say is you prefer things that other people don't, but you didn't choose which things you prefer. And you didn't control if you were exposed to them.
I consider thoughts in the same way as external events. You can't control what events you encounter in life and you can't control what thoughts you have. You can go to places you prefer but you don't control which places you prefer. You can stop and examine a thought that interests you, but you don't control which thoughts interest you.
You can do things to change how people are but you can't control what you do about it. But if you think of them as people who don't have control of how they act, that will effect how you treat them. In a positive way I think.
It would help if you answered these questions as yes / no so we can hopefully see where we disagree.
Do you control what your favorite flavor ice cream is?
Do you control if you are exposed to that flavor ice cream?
Do you control what thoughts you have?
Do you control what interests you have?
Sorry the above message was intended for #18931