Summary
This article intends to answer the following three questions:
- What is the definition of free will in an ideal state?
- In what kind of ideal world can this ideal free will exist?
- If an ideal world does not exist, and consequently ideal free will does not exist, what kind of approximation of ideal free will do we actually possess in the real world?
Free Will in an Ideal State
- Individual Attribution: First and foremost, free will must belong to every human individual. If there is only a God who controls the entire world and possesses free will, while we are all puppets manipulated by Him unable to decide our own fate, this is called theological fatalism, not free will.
- Decision Making: The core of free will lies in decision-making; it lies in my genuinely making a decision among different options that aligns with my will, rather than others making the choice for me. If I merely feel subjectively that I made a choice but effectively cannot make a choice, that is a “sense of free will,” not free will itself.
- Effective Agency: To make effective decisions, it must be ensured that I can truthfully gather information about this world, and that my actions can truthfully and effectively influence this world. If all my actions are performed in complete ignorance, or if I do not know what impact my actions cause—to the extent that I cannot determine if my actions have any effect at all—I am like a blind person with intact eyes but severed optic nerves. Even if I had free will, it would be useless.
- The Subject: Free will belongs to an existence that can say “I”—that is, a Subject. Therefore, we must determine what “I” is, to determine what actions are emitted by “I” and align with “I’s” will. Furthermore, the Subject exists within the world; without a world and without anything that is “non-subject,” we would have no scope of activity. Consequently, we need to discuss how our world operates within the necessary scope of demonstrating free will.
The World in an Ideal State
Although there is no empirical conclusion yet on whether our world is deterministic or accidental (indeterministic), we can directly assume the world is either deterministic or accidental to see if free will can exist in these model worlds. This helps us rule out certain types of worlds.
Accidentalism (Indeterminism): This theory posits that the world is completely random, and the existence of all things is accidental. The foundation of this theory is threatened because Accidentalism must answer whether the rule “everything is accidental” is itself necessary. If it is, the theory contradicts its own definition, or it must admit that “everything is accidental” is a stable meta-rule transcending all things, making itself a special, second-order “Meta-Determinism.” Secondly, if “everything is accidental” is not necessary—meaning the world assumed by this theory is itself uncertain—it could collapse due to chance at any moment and become a deterministic world. If we assume Meta-Determinism Accidentalism holds true, the existence of free will still faces many problems. This implies there is no necessity guaranteeing the existence of free will; any choice we make can only be accidental, the success of these choices is accidental, the authenticity of the information we use for decision-making is accidental, and the continued existence of free will within the subject is accidental. Even the existence of the Subject and the observable universe itself could be accidental. This directly violates all four assumptions of ideal free will discussed earlier. We can conclude that the existence of free will must be built upon some foundation of necessity.
Determinism: In the classic definition of Laplace’s Demon, this theory holds that the world is completely determined. The past, present, and future are interconnected via a non-anthropomorphic law of causality. If I could know all the information at the universe’s origin, I could completely and precisely calculate the universe’s outcome. This macro-physical determinism is currently challenged by quantum mechanics. However, we must consider that quantum mechanics uses quantum decoherence to explain why things exhibit classical physical behavior at the macro level; therefore, macro-physical determinism remains functionally stable. Based on the analysis of Accidentalism, the randomness of quantum mechanics does not endorse free will; in fact, if not for the fact that quantum mechanics allows for a high approximation of classical physical determinism at the macro level, its existence might conversely harm free will. However, relying solely on reductionist macro-physical determinism is difficult to construct free will, as it reduces all human action to pure material motion and reduces all human subjective experience and the spiritual world to electrical currents in the brain.
Compatibilism: Finally, we are led to this position: free will indeed requires some form of determinism to operate, but determinism can take many forms and does not necessarily have to be physical reductionism. We can conceive of a minimum determinism that serves free will. It would possess the following characteristics:
- It ensures the existence of the entire world, including the Subject, is necessary; humanity will not suddenly vanish, nor will the world suddenly leave us.
- It involves time assurance; humans with free will must exist long enough to make choices.
- It ensures the necessity of the Subject’s behavior; the certainty of the success of our actions is guaranteed—success is not due to luck, but truly gained through the efforts of free will.
- It can explain why the existence of free will itself is necessary, requiring the introduction of rules different from physical determinism to explain the principles of free will.
Thus, we establish a basic line of thought: an ideal world guarantees the existence of the world itself and the Subject through a certain Compatibilist determinism, thereby guaranteeing the existence of free will upon the Subject. Next, we can examine the real world to see how it differs from the theoretical world and judge the degree to which ideal free will is realized in reality.
Determinisms of the Real World
Methodology: As I write this, I presuppose that other readers with thinking abilities like mine will read these words and interpret meaning from them. I will not write anything inappropriate because I do not want negative social consequences. Given that my subjective experience is influenced by others, and based on daily observation, I assume others possess subjective experiences similar to mine. In short, I assume mentally and physically healthy humans possess complete subjective experiences and states of consciousness. Based on empirical observation, I will discuss the various determinisms I observe in the real world, describing their features while avoiding metaphysical arguments that might veer off topic.
Physical Determinism: Undeniably, physical determinism (or approximate macro-physical determinism under quantum mechanics) exists to a large extent. The computer I use, the building I am in, and the traffic outside exist because of human understanding and practice of physics. We obey physical laws and utilize them. We can split physical determinism into two parts:
- Physical Laws: e.g., the existence of gravity is a rule.
- Contents within Laws: e.g., Earth has less gravity because of smaller mass; the Sun has more gravity due to larger mass. Humans are contents under a rule; for example, on a trampoline, our body’s gravitational potential energy is converted via elastic material into kinetic energy that bounces us up.
Biological Determinism: However, upon slight observation, we find that while everything obeys physical determinism, not everything obeys only physical determinism. Earthly life, based on obeying physical determinism, also obeys a new rule that emerged and developed billions of years ago from primitive cells in deep-sea hydrothermal vents: Evolution, or Biological Determinism. Biological determinism’s regulation of us is obvious. Under hormonal regulation, humans almost inevitably engage in behaviors to maintain homeostasis: seeking food for hunger, seeking warmth in cold, cooling down in heat, and seeking safety for sleep. This includes common topics like dopamine. Secondly, while obeying evolution, humans (as contents of this rule) use this rule to modify other contents. For example, the domestication of wild animals and plants allows us to widely consume various staple foods, fruits, vegetables, and meats, even if the fundamental motivation for this domestication is hunger and survival instinct.
Social Determinism: Human behavior differs from other animals. We use complex language, display richer emotions and abstract rational thinking, and critically, humans inherit productivity and knowledge—perhaps too much. Our nations, ethnicities, social and family cultural customs, moral norms, language usage, common sense, entertainment, academic disciplines, fashion design, and cooking methods are all social concepts and physical artifacts that existed before we were born as “contents.” We almost instinctively and inevitably continue this social inertia, taking these artifacts from our parents, adding slight innovation or retro-style, and passing them to the next generation. This is Social Determinism. Whether good or bad, employed or unemployed, student or dropout, democracy or dictatorship, elite or mass—the depth and breadth of most conflicts and identity politics in society are far older and grander than any individual existence. We are not using these tags; the tags are using us. An ideology, as a rule of cultural memes, reproduces like genes through propaganda and violent institutions built by its believers to create more believers. An interesting saying is: “A language is a dialect with an army and a navy.” This illustrates the cooperation of the Triple Determinism: modern rulers acquire the capital dialect from parents/environment (Biological/Social inheritance); combined with the social inertia that the capital symbolizes authority, this dialect—not others—is adopted as the national language. This unification is driven by benefits (social cohesion, military mobilization, economic exchange—socially constructed benefits) and the ruler’s subjective experiences/biological instincts (elitism, savior complex, fear of competitors). Finally, all these actions must occur in a physical world, requiring the physical construction of schools and the physical elimination of rebels via military means.
Diversified, Holistic Hierarchical Determinism: We have summarized that Biological Determinism and Social Determinism emerge on the foundation of Physical Determinism. The relationship between these three is connected based on the holistic principle that “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.” The key is that the determinisms of our universe are more like a variable function than a constant function. Physical determinism limits things like superluminal speed or time reversal, but it gives existences within these norms the ability to evolve according to specific rules. Physical, Biological, and Social determinisms are productive, not just regulating a single unchangeable result. These layers of rules are like a ladder; through successive limitations, they bring more evolutionary laws, significantly increasing the complexity of the contents and finally providing the possibility for the birth of a more exquisite creation: Free Will.
Free Will in the Real State
Social determinism does not abandon biological and physical determinism but parasites upon the organism and uses physical activities for self-propagation. Biological determinism parasites upon physical determinism; from single cells to global ecosystems, life constantly utilizes and modifies inorganic physical reality. As we categorized, our existence is the content run under these rules:
- Physical Contents: Space occupied, heat emitted.
- Biological Contents: Five senses, organ health.
- Social Contents: Beliefs in our brain, interpersonal relationships.
When we further examine the individual “Self,” a new determinism called Self-Identity surfaces.
Self-Identity: Self-identity is born from the conflicts between the contents of physical, biological, and social determinism within an individual. Sometimes, the operation of contents under one rule leads to the loss of contents under another. For example, important indoor activities required by human society lead to a lack of outdoor exercise, resulting in mass myopia. We need to provide a reasonable cause for these content changes produced by the determinisms. Often, a single layer of reflection satisfies self-identity: “I am nearsighted because of studying; many people are nearsighted; this is a necessary cost paid for social activity.”
Infinite Regression (The Infinite Step-Back): However, we have emerged a special ability: the ability of infinite backward reflection. We can always observe a part of ourselves and separate it for study. For instance, when immersed in sadness, we have the ability to think, “Why do I feel sad?” This observer, or “Viewpoint,” takes a step back when you try to observe the viewpoint itself. That is, you realize “I am observing myself,” but the moment you realize this, you are already standing behind that proposition to scrutinize it. This backward step can operate infinitely. No matter how you try to grasp the viewpoint itself, you find that every act of meta-observation can be scrutinized by stepping back again. You cannot find the end point of that regression. This infinite regression means we can always become outsiders, even outsiders to the outsider. We can scrutinize all our actions by taking a step back. When anxious about grades, you can ask “Why am I anxious about grades?” and then “Why did I suddenly start thinking about my grade anxiety?” and “What is the basis of thinking? Could humans think without language?”
This endless reflection gives Self-Identity a massive challenge. We constantly question the changes brought by the various determinisms. Even an explanation that satisfies me might not fool me, because my “feeling satisfied” can also be scrutinized. This questioning forces Self-Identity—the Fourth Layer of Determinism—to constantly grow. We ultimately become an existence that can realize we are within the Triple Determinism while being within it, and use the rules given to us by the Triple Determinism to modify the contents also given to us. This is because the fourth determinism constructs a “Self” that can infinitely regress to allow for such awareness.
When we cannot find a reason no matter what, Free Action begins. Jean-Paul Sartre, in Existentialism is a Humanism, gave an example: during WWII, a young Frenchman asked him if he should join the army to serve his country or stay with his elderly mother. Sartre’s answer was that there is no pre-set answer; he must make his own choice and bear the full cost. Man is condemned to be free. When you have carefully weighed all possibilities and feelings based on your conditions, the choice you make must be the most authentic, the one that most satisfies self-identity, and thus, the one most aligned with your will—even if your will is created by physical, biological, and social determinisms.
Know Thyself: Know the physical self, the biological self, the social self. As you know more about yourself, you will find many things are not yours to decide. But precisely this gives you space for action. A player who doesn’t know the game rules can only explore blindly. Moreover, rules are the source of fun. If the universe were completely random with no rules, you could only stare blankly. But because the universe has rules, you can utilize them to achieve specific goals, and use primal rules to construct new rules you desire (e.g., personal principles). People don’t really hate determinism; they hate determinism that doesn’t align with their will.
Recognizing these deterministic selves does not mean one must rebel. On the contrary, we obey the determinism of Self-Identity. For example, a patriot knows he did not choose his birthplace, culture, or language—all were given from the outside. Yet, after examining other societies and carefully weighing them, he still chooses to love his country. Is this not precious? Broadening this: When you realize you live in a universe with fixed physical constants, an ecosystem with forests and oceans, a society with both nobility and sin, and a family with a specific background… when you realize all this is “given” and inherited from the past, yet you still choose to approve of your existence, love your existence, and choose to live on. Romain Rolland once said: “There is only one heroism in the world: to see the world as it is, and to love it.”
Conclusion
Now, we can attempt to define Free Will: Free Will is the right to modify the contents of the three conflicting determinisms within the self—granted by the infinite regression of the viewpoint—and the right to modify the modification right itself. “Will” refers to the rules and contents of these determinisms we possess. Free Will is that “thing” which, after careful thought and weighing, recognizes what the self truly is, and consequently makes the choice most aligned with the self.
Free Will is the form of the Self’s Determinism established upon the cornerstone of the Triple Determinism.
论自由意志
概要
本文意图回答以下三个问题：
1.一个理想状态下的自由意志的定义到底是什么？
2.在什么样的理想世界当中，这个理想的自由意志得以存在？
3.如果理想世界并不存在，进而理想自由意志并不存在，我们在现实世界当中到底拥有什么样的，近似理想自由意志的东西？
理想状态下的自由意志
1.自由意志首先是得归属于每一个人类个体的。如果这个世界上只有一个控制了一整个世界的上帝拥有自由意志，而我们都是被他操纵的，无法决定自己命运的玩偶，这叫神学宿命论而不是自由意志。
2.自由意志的核心在于决策，在于我真正的在不同选项当中做出了符合我意志的决定，而不是其他人替我做选择。如果我只是在主观体验上感觉我做了选择但我实际上无法做出选择，那叫自由意志感，而不是自由意志。
3.为了有效的做出决策，必须被确保的是我可以真实的收集到关于这个世界的信息，并且我的行为也可以真实并且有效的影响这个世界，如果我的一切行为都是在完全的无知当中做出的，我也不知道我的行为到底会导致什么影响以至于我根本无法确定我的行为到底有没有影响，我就如同一个眼球完好但是视神经被切断的瞎子，就算我有自由意志也毫无用武之地。
4.自由意志是属于每一个可以言说“我”的存在的，也就是主体的。因此我们也必须确定到底什么才是“我”，进而才能确定什么行为是“我”发出的，是符合“我”的意志的。但是进一步的，主体是存在于世界当中的，如果没有世界、没有任何非主体的东西，我们就没有任何的活动范围，进而，我们也需要在论证自由意志的必要范围内讨论我们的世界是如何运作的。
理想状态下的世界
我们的世界到底是决定论还是偶然论的在目前为止依然没有实证定论，但是我们可以直接通过假设世界是决定论的或者偶然论的来看看在这些模型世界当中自由意志是否能够存在，这可以帮助我们排除掉一些世界。
偶然论：该理论认为世界是完全随机的，一切事物的存在都是偶然的。这个理论本身的存在根基就是受威胁的，因为偶然论需要回答“万物皆偶然”这个规则本身是否是必然的，如果是，这个理论就违背了自己的定义，或者只能承认“万物皆偶然”是超脱万物的、稳固的元规则，使得自身成为了一种特殊的、二阶的、元决定论。其次，如果“万物皆偶然”本身不是必然的，也就是说这个理论所假设的世界本身就是不确定的、偶然的，那么它就有可能可以在任何一刻因为偶然性垮塌而坍缩成为决定论世界。现在，如果我们假设元决定论下的偶然论是成立的，那么自由意志的存在依然会面临许多问题，因为这意味着没有任何必然性可以保证自由意志的存在，我们所做出的任何选择都只能是偶然的，并且这些选择能否成功也只能是偶然的，我们用以决策的各种信息的真实性也是偶然的，自由意志是否可以依然存在于主体当中也是偶然的，甚至主体和我们现在位于的一整个可观测宇宙本身的存在也可以是偶然的，这直接违反了先前探讨理想自由意志的全部四条假设。最终我们可以得出的结论是，自由意志的存在必须建立在某种必然性的基础之上。
决定论：在最经典的拉普拉斯信条的定义中，该理论认为世界是完全确定的，世界的过去、现在与未来经由一个非人格化的因果律而相互联结，如果我可以得知宇宙起点的全部信息，我就可以一路完全精准的把宇宙的结局推算出来。这个宏观物理决定论现在正在面临量子力学的挑战，但我们必须考虑到，量子力学使用量子退相干来解释为什么事物会在宏观层面上呈现出经典物理行为，因此宏观物理决定论在功能上依然是稳固的。并且基于先前对偶然论的分析，量子力学的随机性并不能为自由意志背书，甚至如果不是因为量子力学允许在宏观层面上高度近似经典物理决定论，其存在都有可能反过来伤害自由意志。不过，单纯靠还原论式的宏观物理决定论本身还是难以构造出自由意志的，因为它会把一切人类行动都还原成存粹的物质运动，而把一切人类的主观体验与精神世界还原成大脑中的电流。
相容论：最后我们不得不导向这个立场，即自由意志的确是需要某种决定论来运作的，但决定论可以有很多种，并不一定只能是物理还原论。我们可以设想一个最低限度的为自由意志所服务的决定论，它会具备这样几个特征，首先，它确保包括主体在内一整个世界的存在是必然的，全体人类不会突然从这个世界上消失，而世界也不会突然离开我们。并且，这种必然性涉及到时间保障，也就是说，有自由意志的人类必须要能够存在足够长的时间来让我们可以去做出选择，如果人类必然存在至少一秒就因为其他必然的各种原因而死去，这并不利于自由意志。其次，它确保主体的行为具备必然性，也就是我们的一些行动的成功的确定性是有保障的，不是因为运气好才成功的，而真的是因为自由意志的努力才获得的。最后，它可以解释自由意志本身的存在为何是必然的，它需要引入一些不同于物理决定论的规则来解释自由意志的原理。
就此，我们确立了一个基本的思维路径，一个理想的世界是通过某种相容论决定论保障了世界自身与主体的存在，进而保障了主体之上的自由意志的存在的。而接下来，我们就可以开始考察现实世界了，看看真实世界与理论世界到底有何不同的，进而来判断理想化的自由意志在现实当中的实现程度到底有多少。
现实世界的诸决定论
考察方法论：就在我写这篇文章的时候，我已经预设有其他和我一样具备思维能力的读者会阅读这些文字并且从中解读出一些含义，并且我并不会在这个文章当中写任何不得体的内容，因为我并不想要获得负面的社会影响，考虑到我的主观体验确实是会受到他人的影响的，而且凭借我在日常生活当中的观察，我认为他人同样具备和我类似的主观体验。总的来说，我直接假设精神与身体健康的人类具备完善的主观体验与意识状态，并且在我们的世界当中，经验观察可以形成一些最起码实用的结论，因此接下来我就会来讨论我观察到的现实世界的诸决定论，我会直接描述这些决定论呈现出来的各种特征而避免进行可能导致偏题的形而上学论证。
物理决定论：不可否认的是，物理决定论或者量子力学下的近似宏观物理决定论的确是在很大程度上存在的，我用以写作这篇文章的电脑、我所在的楼房、外面街道上的车水马龙都是因为人类的物理学认识与实践而得以存在的，我们遵从物理规律并加以利用，这显而易见。而且，我们可以把物理决定论内部拆分为两个部分，一个就是物理规律，比如说引力的存在本身就是一个规则，而另外一个则是规律下的内容物，比如说地球因为质量更小而引力更小，而太阳因为质量更大而引力更大。人类自身就是一个规则下的内容物，例如在蹦床上的时候，我们自己身体带来的重力势能最终通过弹性材料被转换成可以将我们向上弹起的动能。
生物决定论：但是，稍加观察的话，我们就会发现，虽然世间万物都遵从物理决定论，但并非都只遵从物理决定论。地球生命在遵从物理决定论的基础上还遵从了一种新的规则，这个规则是在几十亿年前的远古地球深海热液喷口当中由有机大分子组成的原始细胞诞生后开始涌现而出并不断得到发展的，也就是进化论，或者说生物决定论。生物决定论对我们的规范也是十分明显的，在各种激素的调控下，人类几乎必然的会去进行一系列诸如想办法获取食物来果腹，通过各种方式在寒冷的地方取暖而在炎热的地方降温，寻求一个安全的地方来进行睡眠等维持内稳态的行为。更不用提多巴胺之类的一系列老生常谈的话题了。其次，人类同样也是在遵从进化论的同时，作为这个规则的内容物来利用这个规则去修改其他内容物，例如，对各路野生动物与植物的驯化使得在今天我们可以广泛的食用各种各样的主粮、水果、蔬菜与肉类，哪怕这种驯化活动本身的根本动力是饥饿与生存本能。
社会决定论：不过，人类和其他动物之间的行为依然是存在着一些区别的，我们能够使用复杂的语言，展现更加丰富的情感与抽象理性思维，而且最关键的是，人类传承生产力与知识，甚至传承的有点太多了。我们的国家与民族、社会与家庭的文化习俗，道德规范，语言使用，常识，娱乐活动，学科划分，服装设计，烹饪手法等一系列社会观念与物理人造物作为内容物都是先于我们出生就存在了的，我们几乎本能的并且不可避免的延续着这些社会惯性，从我们的父母手上接过这些人造物，加以些许创新或复古，然后就传给下一代人。这是社会决定论的，无论是好人与坏人，上班族与失业游民，三好学生与辍学生，民主与独裁，精英与大众，这个社会当中大部分的对立冲突以及身份政治的历史深度与广度都比一个个体的存在久远的多，也宏大的多，不是我们在利用这些标签，而是标签在利用我们。一个意识形态作为文化模因的规则就像是基因一样，通过它的信徒搭建的各种宣传机构与暴力机构来完成再生产，从而制造更多信徒，一种十分有趣的说法是：语言就是拥有陆军和海军的方言。如果进一步解释这个说法的话，这就是三重决定论的相互协作，在近代，许多统治者因为文化模因的遗传而从父母与周围的生存环境当中习得了首都方言，外加首都就是政府权威的象征是一个社会惯性下的常识，那么首都方言，而不是其他方言，就这样被采纳作为推广到全国的国家语言了。当然，之所以一开始要统一语言是因为其带来的众多好处，例如消弭潜在的民族分歧，进一步确立国家权威与军事动员，利于经济文化交流等，但这些好处本身的存在在很大程度上都是社会构建出来的。而且语言统一归根结底还是被统治者的许多主观体验与生物本能所驱动的，例如精英主义与救世主情结，以及成就感和对全能自恋的满足，还有对于其他竞争国家的猜忌与恐惧。最后，上述的这一切行为本身都需要发生在一个物理世界，而且在实际的实施过程当中需要物理的在全国各地建立学校，以及通过军事手段来物理消灭反抗者。
多元化的，整体论的层级决定论：现在，我们终于通过对现实的考察而总结出了在物理决定论的基础上涌现而出的生物决定论和社会决定论，这三个决定论之间的关系是基于整体论的基本原则“整体大于部分之和”而相互联结的。其关键在于，我们宇宙的这些决定论更像是一个变量函数，而不是一个常数函数，这意味着，物理决定论在一方面限制了超光速、逆转时间或者一个其他物理常数的世界的同时，给了这些规范内的存在按照特定规则进行演变的能力。物理、生物与社会等诸决定论，是生产性的，而不只规范了一个无法变化的单一结果的。甚至说，这些一层层的规则就像是梯子一样，通过一次次限定带来了越来越多的演化法则，从而显著的提高了内容物的复杂度并最终为这更加精妙的造物，也就是自由意志的诞生提供了可能。
现实状态下的自由意志
社会决定论并没有抛弃生物决定论与物理决定论，而是寄生于有机体之上，并且也利用各种物理活动来实现自我传播。生物决定论则是寄生于物理决定论，从最早的单细胞到现在遍布地球的生态系统，生物不断的利用与改造无机的物理现实。这是一个从下到上的金字塔结构。其次，正如同我们之前划分的那样物理、生物与社会决定论有着各自的规则与内容物，而我们的存在其实就是在这些规则下运行出来的内容物，我们有物理内容物（例如我们占据的空间、散发的热能之类的）、生物内容物（我们的五感、各种器官的健康状态之类的）和社会内容物（我们脑海中的各种信念，人际关系之类的）。而当我们进一步考察一个个体的自我的时候，一种叫做自我同一性的全新决定论浮出了水面。
自我同一性是因为个体身上物理、生物与社会决定论内容物之间产生的冲突而诞生的，有的时候一些规则下内容物的运作会导致其他规则下内容物的损失，例如，人类社会与社交所要求的长时间不进行户外运动的各种重要的室内活动最终导致了大规模近视的爆发。我们需要解释为诸决定论所产生的这些内容物变动给出一个合理的原因，当然，在许多情况下，原因很简单，因为我们只需要进行一层反思就可以暂且满足自我同一性了，例如“我之所以近视是因为学习导致的，况且许多人都近视了，这是为了社会活动所支付的必要代价。”。
但与自我同一性伴随着还有一种特殊的能力，即进行无限倒退式反思的能力，我们总是可以观察我自己的一部分，并且将其分离出来加以研究，例如，在我们沉浸于悲伤的情绪当中的时候，我们是能力去思考“为什么我会感到悲伤？”的。而且这样一个观察者或者说视点，会在你试图观察视点自身时往后倒退一步，也就是说，你会意识到“我在观察我自己”，但当你意识到这一刻的时候，你已经是站在这个命题背后来审视的了。而且这种倒退是可以无限运作的，无论你如何试图把握这个视点本身，你都会发现自己的一切元观察行为本身都是可以被退后一步加以审视的，你无法找到那个倒退的终点。这种无限倒退意味意味着我们随时都可以成为局外人，甚至成为局外人的局外人。对于我们的一切所作所为，我们都可以通过向后退一步来加以认识，比如当你在为了成绩而感到焦虑的时候，你是可以去思考”为什么我要为了成绩而焦虑？”，而且你总是可以退一步，并且再退一步，例如”为什么我现在突然开始思考我的成绩焦虑？“，以及”思考的基础是什么？如果人类没有语言还能思考吗？“。
这种永无止境的反思行为，有可能是人类智力演化当中因为个体与个体的博弈，群体与群体的博弈而逐渐筛选出来的，它会给予自我同一性一个天大的挑战，我们会不断的追问诸决定论带来的变化，哪怕是让我自己感到满意的解释也不能拿来糊弄我，因为我的感受本身也是可以被审视的，我觉得好不代表真的好。这种追问最终会让自我同一性这个第四层的决定论不断生长，我们最终可以成为那个可以在三重决定论之内还能意识到我们处在三重决定论，并且还利用三重决定论给予我们的规则来对同样是被给予我们的内容物进行修改的存在，因为第四个决定论构造出了一个可以无限倒退的自我来让我们能够进行这样的觉察。而当我们无论如何都无法找到理由的时候，自由的行动便开始了，萨特在《人道主义是一种存在主义》当中举过这样一个例子，在二战期间一位法国年轻人问他，自己到底是应该参军报效国家还是应该留守在自己的老母亲身边，萨特给出的回答是根本不存在既定答案，他必须要做出自己的选择并为此承担全部的代价，人是被判为自由的。当你根据自身条件谨慎权衡过你能想到的全部的可能性与感受的时候，你做出的选择一定是最本真的，最能满足自我同一性的，进而，是最符合你的意志的，哪怕你的意志就是由物理、生物、社会决定论造就的。
认识你自己，那个物理学的自己、生物学的自己、社会学的自己。伴随着你对你自己的认识越来越多，你会发现自己身上有许多并非自己能够决定的东西，但正是如此，才给了你行动的空间，一个不知道游戏规则的玩家只能盲目探索。况且，规则正是乐趣的源泉，如果宇宙是完全随机的，没有任何规则的，也无法主动创造出任何规则，你就只能坐着干瞪眼。但正是因为宇宙拥有一些规则，所以你才可以利用这些规则去实现特定的目的，并且你还可以用这些原初规则去构造自己想要的一些新规则，例如你的个人原则与信条。在许多情况下，人们并不真的讨厌决定论本身，而是讨厌不符合自己意志的决定论，但如果自己就能心想事成，便又满足了。
其次，认识到这些决定论式的自己并不意味着一定要反叛抑或是顺从，真正的关键在于，由于我们必然的寻求自我同一性，而有着一个无限倒退的视点永远呆在意识的幕后随时准备对现有的同一性解释发起挑战，这就意味着我们的自我会在人生历程当中不断发生变化，无论是反思是被动的还是主动的，我们都被抛入了对本真自我的决定论式的追求当中。在这种追求当中，我们会为了人生叙事的完备性而反过来利用三重决定论的规则来修改三重决定论给予我们的内容物，例如
例如，对于一个爱国主义者，当他明知道自己并没有选择要出生在那个国家，选择什么文化与语言，这一切都是从外界被给予的时候，他却在对其他社会进行考察之后，通过谨慎权衡依然选择热爱自己的祖国，这难道不可贵吗？进一步扩大化的说，当你认识到自己活在这样一个固定物理常数的宇宙，生存在这样一个有着森林、沙漠、冰原、海洋的，当中居住着各种看着可爱或是恶心的生物的生态系统，栖息于这样一种智慧物种的高尚与罪恶、痛苦与美好并存的社会当中，出生在这样一个无论有着怎样背景与风格的家庭，以及最后因为过去的种种经历而成为了现在的这样一个人，当你意识到这一切都是被给予的，都是从过去传承而来的时候，你却依然选择认可自己的存在，喜爱自己的存在，选择活下去。罗曼罗兰有一个名言，世界上只有一种英雄主义：便是注视世界的真面目——并且爱世界。
结语 现在，我们终于可以试着给自由意志一个定义了，自由即视点的无限倒退所给予的对任何自我当中冲突的三种决定论内容物的修改权以及对修改权本身的修改权，而意志则是我们身上所拥有的这些诸决定论的规则与内容物。自由意志就是在谨慎思考与权衡后，能够认识到自己到底是什么，进而做出最符合自我的选择的那个东西。自由意志是自我的决定论建立于三重决定论的基石上的模样。
George luo's personal site 