[MD] Freedom within structure.

[david buchanan]

Steve said:
Free will is agency plus something else. It is the something else that I deny.



dmb asked:
Plus something else? Why does moral agency have to be something extra behind moral agency? ..Where did you ever get the idea that there has to be something extra behind free will in order for it to be free will?



Steve answered:
 From the quote you provided from the Stanford encyclopedia... “Free Will” is a philosophical term of art for a PARTICULAR SORT of capacity of rational agents to choose a course of action from among various alternatives. WHICH SORT is the free will sort is what all the fuss is about." Again, it is not merely the capacity to choose, it is the capacity of a RATIONAL agent to choose. And not even merely that capacity but a PARTICULAR SORT of that capacity.



dmb says:
I don't see how this even begins to answer the question. Let's strike "rationality" as an essential feature. We all know that following DQ and following rationality aren't the same thing. So then the most basic definition - from the first paragraph of Stanford's article - says that free will is a particular sort of capacity to choose. That's exactly my dictionary says too. Free will is "the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion." I still don't see how it answers my question to emphasize the word "particular". The Stanford quote doesn't say anything at all about free will being agency "plus something else". Since my question is about this "something else", the quote does nothing to answer it. 

My question still stands. What are you talking about? Why can't free will just be some kind of capacity to choose, an ability to act at one's discretion? Once this basic meaning is no longer an obstacle, then we can talk about the particulars, about the MOQ's version of this capacity.  You are not insisting in advance WHICH SORT of free will we are talking about so that it can only be the PARTICULAR SORT that you reject. You're just refusing to admit that there is any such capacity because you insist that it can't just be the capacity to choose. It has to be this agency PLUS SOMETHING ELSE. Why? Nobody is talking about that PARTICULAR SORT of free will. And "something else" scores very high if your aim is to be as vague as possible, by the way.

Hey, I just invented a new word: Frankentard.