Good distinction on definitions of free will – I’d love to see that expanded upon.
However the deterministic view *does* absolve responsibility for actions if, for no other reason, humans are not rational deterministic decision-making machines.
That’s one possible *model* of humans but it’s a model; humans are more complex than that model. We do the wrong thing and we think it’s right. We know what’s right and we do something else instead.
Are all of these determined by our “internal wiring”?
It would, if all we were is internal wiring.
Where does the “push” for decision making come from. Reason? No. Emotion.
Show me a computer model that accurately does the weighing of emotional content and outputs same decision making.
On a gross psychological level, it’s possible. Basic things like stimulus/avoidance response and such I’ve modelled in just a few lines of simple code with basic neural net weighings.
But what of our ability to hold simultaneously contradicting positions?
It’s likely we can map it out *after the fact” but can it be used to predict the emotion–> reason connection effectively?
Also, “feels like a choice” vs “feels like it’s determined” would most certainly play a role in any decision making processes.
Also, consider this: no two humans are in the same state, if one is to think of us as state machines.
It’s just not possible. Too much variation.
Even IF we were deterministic machines, it’s almost a useless piece of information because two different people in two different states utilizing two different perspectives, histories, biases, etc, to use for predicting anything.
Maybe if computers were powerful enough. Maybe. Even then, they couldn’t predict the output of a human unless it was running parallel with the human the entire time.
It looks like free will. it acts like free will. There’s no way to predict its output with accuracy. For all pragmatic purposes, it’s free will.