(Building Upon: The Light of Postmodernism, and Its Very Own Cave ( https://wolframgand.wordpress.com/2017/11/03/the-light-of-postmodernism-and-its-very-own-cave/ ). Point #8; Free Will exists because of the inherent Complexity in the System)
Free will exists, simply because there’s too many factors/vectors for any system to keep track of. Simple enough thought experiment; try tracking down all the people from a “200 person flash mob” that “mugged/robbed/beat you”. Can anyone do that? Maybe if they find the network that facilitated it, but it’s like trying to keep track of 200 molecules for a gas system in chemistry, it ain’t happening. Thus I think at the base free will exists, it’s too complicated to track every little widget down, especially in one life time. The question isn’t if it exists, but if we have it. Yes, and no.
Those who actually take the time, and expend the effort at understanding themselves. To become one’s own taskdriver, may actually have it, as far as I’d think. They have submitted themselves to a higher power (a Selfless-Ego that drives the Self-Ego). Let us ruminate, and get a little bit theoretical.
To be a human, one has to domesticate themselves. Does this sound offensive, yes. Although think about this on a deeper level, if one wasn’t brought up to bear with the current cultural norms, like say potty training on where and how to go to the restroom at the proper time. One who hasn’t done so would be seen as a complete imbecile, and would’ve lost the benefits of a culture hard won over the past 2000 years.
So to run with this idea of self-domestication, one has to think about it. Let’s start with a general tilt in the direction of slavery, harsh yes, but let us speculate that a part if not a portion of human culture. Is heavily dependent upon this notion. Let us say that the earliest slaves, and those who were beaten down due to shear physical brutality. Were some of the first ones to escalate, and develop our species intellectual bent. After all, would it not make sense to have a conceit, or a hidden advantage developed if one is being beaten down by a physically dominant foe? Yes.
An argument could be made that all of human history is built off the idea that we are burdened, and shackled at first. That we are animals first, and foremost. Is this not true? This may be a central conceit to civilization, that society has to be trained for and adjusted to. High school (really k-12), and to an extent college. Is a socialization protocol, and even then they aren’t always successful. Case in point, criminals. Do they operate differently than an average individual, to some yes, to others the baseline human hasn’t much deviation in character. Nature vs. nurture, and all that rot. Taking into account that we’re all roughly born as an entity, and to lower the standards somewhat. Let us say, we aren’t a “person” until we make an active effort to be an “individual”, and/or a “person”. Otherwise we’re an “animal” that acts human.
Thus, we arrive at a chain of thought that it doesn’t matter what race, color, or part of the world you were born into, for there should (in theory) be equal opportunity everywhere. It’s just the restraints, and the norms that one has to take into account in everyday society that dictates the lives one leads. Does a native, from let us say, Texas, U.S.A. to be simple have a clue about “northern” culture? To walk/drive onto a frozen body of water, and all the norms/customs that determine “winter driving” in the “Frosty Regions”? Unless they’ve been exposed to it at some point in their life, they are going to be completely flummoxed by this notion. And earlier the better. Tying this into self-conditioning, there is a notion that yes, there’s the nature, and the earlier childhood nurturing. And yet, we aren’t set in concrete as individuals. Our entire sense of self, and being can be called into question by that foreign “Other”. That alien that causes us to question some sort of “truth” that we had previously established as “concrete” at least for ourselves.
This whole line of reasoning isn’t what I was aiming at, at least entirely, from the starting notions. I was calling up the idea that we are conditioned to behave in whatever manner society at the time dictates us to be cultured for (we are normalized to the normal, essentially). And this applies to about everything in society, yes, it’s a construct, yes, it can change, but the change has to start from within ourselves. And to do that, we have to be our own “master”. We can’t let others dictate our course of actions from the point onwards where we are deemed an “Adult”. Truth be told there are no “adults” it is merely a distinction set, and codified legally. Another constructed means. And this freedom along with the responsibility can be very troubling. “What is one, nonetheless I, supposed to do in Life?”. Well, politely, whatever one wishes to do, and/or accomplish. This one life of yours is entirely about you. Regardless of what religion, philosophy, politics, and even science states, or implies. There is no right path to follow, there is only one’s own path.
It doesn’t matter if it’s colorful, derogatory, demeaning, or upright, so long as it is YOURS. One has to be able to accept that. Regardless of tone of life that you take, there’ll always be competition, and detractors. Accept it. And in that regard, if one truly desires the self-mastery that comes with being one’s own master. Realize that you are responsible for holding oneself to task. Everything that you do that you consider wrong, and don’t hold yourself accountable for, is a slipping and a failing of your personal integrity (you’ve devalued yourself in your own eyes). Being a “master of self”, cuts both ways, one has to give oneself direction, and in turn hold their self to their standard. You have to build yourself up (positive reinforcement conditioning), and be willing, and this is key, willing to punish your “Self” out of failure (negative reinforcement conditioning).
Yes, there’s a lot of talk about acceptance, and you should just “accept me for who I am”, but really. Is the notion that you are accepted going to change much? At this point, I should make mention that the positive/negative reinforcement thoughts are based upon classical psychology (Pavlov’s Experiments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_conditioning ). In which a dog (an animal like we are) is conditioned to react to a bell every time it was served a meal. Overtime, it would start to salivate with just the bell tone, and no food delivered.
Now as an animal, aren’t we too privy to being conditioned this way? I’d say yes, and it’s done all the time whether we’re aware of it or not. Potty training? Yes. Buying stuff, yes. All positive feedback, but what happens when one starts to apply negative reinforcement. “Oh, that’s bad…”, may be the instinctive response simply because of the word “negative”. And yet, if there is no counter to the positive, what happens? The “Trophy Generation”? Why can’t a person, and I do mean person, and not in a generic everybody’s a person sense, but everyone who’s taken time to become (express) true individuality authentically as they see fit. They are a person, those who go around rehashing words they’ve heard elsewhere, or supporting whatever political/societal platform because “so-n-so” is doing it, or “they said so”…are they really a person? Deep down, maybe.
It is the “Self-less Ego” that takes the “ego” to task. It is selfless because it doesn’t care about the “negative reinforcement” that it has to dole out. It is a task it will do to either the willing, or the unwilling Self (Ego/id, respectively). Call it super-ego, or whatever you wish to call it, but the super-ego is more about the social constraints/conditioning. The culture that surrounds us. I’m talking about a “4th” partition of the psyche where a person takes into account those “three: Id, Ego, Super-Ego”, and deconstructs all of them. To the point where it can rebuild all of them. It’s like building a triangular pyramid in one’s psyche. One has the “id” (the animal-like), and base slave. The Ego, who is seen as the individual (normally/classically) taking the place of the middleman in Super-Ego’s Society. There has to be a higher mandating power that dictates that the “id” needs to work, and how. And when it is supposed to be punished for breaching the character of the Super-ego.
The “Self-less Ego” is like a Pharaoh, it is transcendent, it gets us closer to the “divine”, and gives us direction in life, for the pyramid that is being constructed is it’s “tomb”. It’s tomb is what we wish as a higher goal to accomplish for, and with our life. Thus those who can master themselves, and treat themselves accordingly, should be able to benefit from the notion of Free-will. Oddly through submissive behavior to themselves, and a higher calling. Freedom is a chain used to constrain our action to our own desires.