Free Will vs. (and) Determinism
I have been having a tireless debate with a friend about freewill and determinism. We have researched and regurgitated some of other people's arguments but it seems that our arguments never confront one another's. My description of the argument will be biased (I believe in determinism - kind of).
I believe there are four possibilities
1. we have a determined future: We have our brain, biology, environment, and they interact in a specific way. What can possible change that?
2. at some level, particles move completely randomly, so our future isn't necessarily set, not because of free will, but because of those pesky little particles.
3. God asserts his will, but with rationality: our future is set, because a rational God is destined to make the same decisions (that argument might be incomplete, but we don't care about this one anyway.
4. God acts randomly, same outcome as 2, but because of a chaotic God.
For arguments sake, we stick only to number 1 - we have a determined future: (we have our brain, biology, environment) and they interact in a specific way. What can possible change that? I may be missing some variable here, but whatever the variable, I can't see anything that would change the path (we are always going to do what we are going to do. We will still make decisions and will have to live with the consequences of those decisions, but we were bound to make those exact decisions.
His argument is, we have free will and the outcome of our lives is not set. He makes a better and more complex argument, but I don't think any of it refutes number 1.
Our question: What is the best and most concise way of putting my argument (number 1), and what is the best rebuttal to it? I know this is a complicated and timeless debate, but we would love two concise arguments that actually confront each other if possible. I don't think random occurrences change anything, because that isn't free will (maybe my opinion).
Thank you so much guys, we appreciate it!
- Free Willy and Deterministic Dan