there is no distinction between
free will and determinism. We think there is because
of our conceptual confusion. At the level of what truly exists... there is no such distinction. What nature decides to do... is both what it desperately wants to do... 

and what it must do. What nature does is a result
of what nature is. Nature wills what it wills
because it is what it is. And it can't will otherwise
without being something that it is not. But of course it is what it is. 

So it wills what it does. There is no external environment
beyond nature... to impose choices on nature. What nature chooses to do
comes out of itself. Therefore it comes out of its being. It's a result of what it is. 

So nature wills what it must will, given what it is. But it does make choices. It couldn't make different choices
because it isn't different. Nature is what it is
and not something else. It does make choices,
but its choices are a direct consequence... 

of what it is. So from that perspective,
what nature wills is what it must. What nature must is exactly what it wills. So there is no distinction... at the level of nature
between free will and determinism. And that's why we can both say... 

you have free will
because you are part of nature. And nature has free will. But why does nature have free will? Because it's the same as determinism,
and determinism is true. So by the same token, you could also say
everything's deterministic. 

Why? Because free will is true. But free will is the same thing as determinism. So everything is deterministic. That was the point
that I was trying to get across. Of course we all make choices. We are part of nature.

We make choices every day,
thousands of choices every day. Starting from whether you touch the ground
with your left or your right foot... the moment you step out of bed. The idea of determinism does not deny... the obvious empirical fact
that we are always making choices.

What it denies
is the abstraction that we call... 'the could have been'. I could have chosen differently. Then I would say
you could only have chosen differently... if you were different,
but you were what you were. Nature was what it was.

So the 'could have been' is an abstraction. And I think it's a fantasy. And it helps me in a sense
that the opposite of determinism... is randomness, right? And as you put in your essay... that is not what we mean
when we say I have free will.

You don't say it's random. No, you mean it is determined, but it is not determined by... It is determined by what you prefer it
to be determined by. Right? That's that what you like to think?
- Yeah

I want it to be determined by my... my wish to sit down here with Bernardo... made me sit down here with Bernardo. But then again, it is determined, right? It's not random. So that's also where you run
into philosophical problems.

So I think analytically, your point is very clear. I think just psychologically... we left the conversation saying that, I think we quoted Fred Matser... and I got a question also, Tom, I mean, can you choose to disallow being played by the universe?

That's sort of what rang with me. A lot of people are not allowing themselves to be played by the universe. That too is a direct result... of what the universe is because those people are part of the universe. So the universe sometimes disallows itself to be played by itself.

That's part of the natural... unfolding of what is, what exists. It is such that this contradiction can emerge. Nature is sometimes self-contradictory. This is empirically obvious, right? Not only from a mathematical perspective, from those theorems...

...of the theory of the 1930s. But empirically obvious as well. So the point is not that you don't choose. We all choose all the time. The point is there is no 'could have been'. The 'could have been' is a human fantasy.

Again, the point is that everything is ultimately determined. Because the people who are very much into free will... they would also reject the notion that one's choices are random. The throw of dice. There is no meaning in that.

If your choices are random, what meaning is in there? So people who are after free will because they associate it with meaning... they themselves will immediately acknowledge... that what they mean by it is not randomness. Therefore, every choice is determined.

The thing is, human intuition in this regard says the following: 'My choices are free if they are determined by me, and not by nature at large.' What people who are into free will... and what they mean by a free choice

is that the choice they make... Let's say my free will choice, is a choice I make. So it is determined, but it's determined by me. It's determined by that which I identify with. I don't identify with my brain activity.

I have never seen it; I identify with my conscious inner life. I identify with my preferences... my tastes, my goals, things that I experience from within. So if my choices are determined by my preferences, my tastes... my goals, then they are free will choices.

Now, there are two arguments why even this doesn't hold water. One is there is no 'you' separate from nature. One is there is no 'you' separate from nature. A 'you' separate from nature... or a 'me' separate from nature is merely nominal.

It's an artifact of language. It follows the structure of language. But the structure of reality is not the structure of language. Language is defined for convenience, for communication. And not to capture and reflect the ontological structure of nature.

That's not what language is about. So there is no 'you' separate from nature. There is no 'me' separate from nature. So there is no choice I make that is determined exclusively... by the linguistic 'me'. Because the 'me' is just molecules in the ocean of nature.

It's determined by nature. Another answer is, even if your choices are free in the sense of being always determined by your will, your preferences are determined by your plans. Who determines your will? Your preferences and your plans? Is it you? Of course not.

If you could choose what you want, you would be the happiest person in the world. Whatever your circumstances, you would simply choose to want precisely the circumstances you happen to have. We don't determine those. So our view is literally not free in the sense that we can just change our wills. We fall in love for who we fall in love with. We don't choose who we fall in love with. Otherwise, we would all fall in love with the person who is available. That's not how reality works.

We don't choose our tastes. We don't choose our preferences. We don't choose even what we want to do in our lives. These things are chosen by nature, you know. Yeah, and I think... Yeah, and I think... What is the business of free will? What is the point...

What do people mean? I'm starting to get you, and I'm just afraid that this will trigger again... The same comment, but that is not a problem. I have something, I think experientially, to bring in. I mean, after a video, I tried... It rang with me, right?

So I, I tried to just live it a bit for a month now, I'd say. What I tried doing is to stop focusing a thinking attention on all the choices I can or cannot make in my life. But just more consciously be aware of how life unfolds, right?

And... I had moments... Not all, but I had moments where it felt
extremely relaxing... to see, okay this is what's now being played out. And what I can bring to it... But I know that's
maybe not the right word.

It's just conscious attention
to just see and experience it and that... sort of got more valuable for me than... than the whole idea of me
making the right or wrong decision. So it's also a shift, I think, at least
from focusing on...

free will making decisions to... to more consciously
being present in the moment. Right? And that helped me. I really like that. I can share how I apply this
to my own life. I'm not saying that this is... I can't make an objective argument
that this is the way to go.

It's just my own way of living my life. For me, every choice I make, and we all make choices... Determinism
does not say that we don't make choices. It is silly. We are always making choices. It is silly. We are always making choices.

Every choice I make for me... is a moment of self-discovery. It's a moment when I reflect and think. I am the entity
who is disposed to make this choice, right now. Every single choice
I make, is a moment of self-discovery.

It's an opportunity for self-insight. It's a revelation, a continuing revelation... of what I am, what I truly am. Which is not Bernardo Kastrup. And that's how I see
meaning in the future. It's the first time
that nature is discovering that...

it has those dispositions. It is the thing that makes those choices. Whether those choices are good choices
or bad choices... particularly the bad ones,
tend to be more meaningful. When you make a self-destructive choice,
reflect upon it.

You are the thing that has the disposition
to make that choice. I have made many self-destructive choices
for a period of 15 years. I was absolutely making
self-destructive choices. So going forward, this notion... that free will and determinism
are the same thing, they are not distinct.

They're not even compatible... because for two things to be compatible,
they first need to be two things. And then what I'm saying
it isn't two things. The first thing it gave me... was this idea that going forward... every choice is a moment of self-discovery
and going backwards.

And going backwards... The notion
that there is 'no could have been' . eliminates regret from your life. That's amazing. That's amazing. That's amazing. That's amazing. And I think also just to people watching this, if you have like... 

intellectual objections, please comment
and we can further discuss it. But I'd suggest a little test. Just try and live it for a while
and see how it feels.

Why Free Will & Determinism Are The Same | Bernardo Kastrup PhD

Essentia Foundation

자유 의지와 결정론은 별개의 개념이 아닙니다.

자유 의지와 결정론의 차이에 대한 개념적 혼란이 있습니다.

자연의 행동은 고의적이기도 하지만 본질적인 본성에 의해 결정되기도 합니다.

자연의 선택은 외부가 아닌 내부에서 비롯됩니다.

자연의 선택은 자연의 존재에 대한 직접적인 결과이며, 자연의 의지는 반드시 이루어져야 하는 것입니다.

인간은 자연의 일부이기 때문에 자유의지를 가지고 있으며, 자연의 자유의지는 결정론과 동일합니다.

결정론과 '그럴 수도 있었을'이라는 개념.

결정론은 인간이 선택을 한다는 사실을 부정하지 않습니다.

'그럴 수도 있었다'는 추상적이고 환상적인 것으로 간주됩니다.

자유 의지는 무작위가 아니라 선호도에 따라 결정됩니다.

선택은 무작위가 아니라 정해져 있어 철학적 문제가 발생할 수 있습니다.

우주가 플레이하는 것을 허용하지 않도록 선택할 수 있나요?

우주에 의해 재생되는 것을 허용하지 않도록 선택할 수 있는지에 대한 질문이 제기됩니다.

자신이 우주에 놀아나는 것을 허용하지 않는 것은 우주의 본질에 따른 결과입니다.

자연은 자기 모순적일 수 있으며, 이는 경험적으로 명백합니다.

핵심은 '그럴 수도 있었을 것'이라는 인간의 환상이 없다는 것입니다.

인간의 직관과 자유 선택의 정의.

인간의 직관에 따르면 선택은 본성이 아닌 스스로 결정하면 자유롭다고 합니다.

자유 의지 선택은 개인의 선호도, 취향, 목표에 따라 결정됩니다.

자연과 분리된 '나'는 존재하지 않으며, '나'는 자연 속의 분자에 불과합니다.

선택은 의지에 의해 결정되더라도 선호도와 계획은 자연에 의해 결정됩니다.

취향, 선호도, 인생 목표는 우리가 선택하는 것이 아니라 천성적으로 정해져 있습니다.

결정론을 가지고 살아가는 개인적인 접근 방식.

선택에 집중하지 않고 순간에 집중하는 개인적인 실험에 대해 설명합니다.

인생의 전개 과정을 의식적으로 경험하는 것이 옳고 그른 결정에 집중하는 것보다 더 가치 있는 일입니다.

이 접근 방식은 객관적인 주장이 아니라 개인적인 생활 방식입니다.

모든 선택은 자기 발견과 자기 통찰의 순간입니다.

의미는 선택을 통한 자기 발견, 심지어 자기 파괴적인 선택을 통해서도 발견할 수 있습니다.

자유 의지와 결정론의 동등성을 받아들인 결과.

동등성을 인정하면 후회가 사라집니다.

이 관점을 가지고 생활하면서 경험을 관찰해 보시길 제안합니다.