No-one is saying that there is "free will" in the Cartesian or Upanishadic sense, they are saying that choices are made.Alex123 wrote: If that "agent" is totally part of cause-effect stream, then that agent and the choices are fully and totally conditioned. There is no free will.
Yes, but the actions that the agent make, even though conditioned, do affect the future. From the article I quoted.Alex123 wrote: That agent is like the puppet being moved by conditions. What has happened, has happened in the only possible way that it ever could have possibly happened. That is why it has happened in this as opposed to that way.
I think a key point is the distinction between determinism and fatalism:The fact that there is only one future may seem to imply that reality
controls agents, and that there is no real freedom.
However, Dennett argues, there is a substantial conceptual error in this argument.
Control is something agents do. Reality, not being an agent, does not control anything.
67 Arguments for inevitability usually overlook the fact that the one possible
future already includes the agent’s predictions, considerations, wishes, decisions,
and actions. These are usually inaccessible in advance simply because they are the
agent’s making.
It seems to me that that confusion over these distinctions can lead to a fatalistic attitude that "it's all predetermined so there's no point in trying to do anything". I agree with Goofaholix that this would be a mistake.The Buddhist rejection
of [Makkhali’s view that purification happens without cause (hetu) or condition (paccaya)]
is not a rejection of a deterministic theory of causality but a rejection of
fatalism. The confusion between fatalism and determinism lies at the heart of the
above-mentioned objection (that determinism implies that agents are controlled by
causality).
Finally, it's worth remembering that:
It is certainly interesting to pursue a philosophical enquiry into the doctrine, but I'm not convinced that it is particularly useful to one's progress. Particularly if the Buddha's instructions for development are misunderstood as encouraging fatalism.The Buddhist treatment of free will has to be extracted from the doctrine, as the
doctrine is by no means a systematic philosophical treatise. Nevertheless, it is clear
that the Buddha saw that freedom has a negative correlation with compulsions.
While the Western tradition tends to emphasize external compulsion and social freedom,
Buddhist doctrine tends to emphasize internal compulsions and psychological
freedom.
Mike