There is always a choice. Originally composed 2013-2014.
I used to think, in my most cynical of moments, that “choice is an illusion.” That in our world, the way in which our forebears set it up and we perpetuate it, the true freedom to choose was lost. This was at its most fleshed-out an anti-establishment ideology, complete with predictions for dystopian futures using as a template today’s “lives lived in quiet desperation.” It tended to promote the belief that the only worthwhile actions were those taken in order to tear down the way the world works from the inside, and that all other actions were futile.
But for some reason, in the summer of 2013, I (well, I'm a good Catholic; I attribute the idea to divine inspiration but I say "I" for conversational purposes) came up with a simple but effective way of negating that entire ideology. I don’t really recall what brought this line of thinking about (there's that divine inspiration I mentioned), but once I worked it out and cleaned it up, it became what I like to call my “metaphysical postulate of everything.” In short, I prove (to myself, at least) that choice is real and not an illusion, and that the existence of real or “true” choice necessitates free will (I call it free agency in my postulate).
TL;DR: even if the choices we make can be distilled into outcomes of biochemical and physiological processes that have statistically-demonstrable probabilities, the possibility that at least two unique choices (inaction is also a choice) can have ultimately identical probabilities of occurring (being “chosen”) necessitates the existence of free will.
Here goes (this is the condensed version, copied from my saved document; in the sections I skip I expand into proving the “Prime Mover” philosophical argument for God as well as demonstrating the impossibility of time travel, both of which I'm mostly leaving out here):
I. Assumptions.
1. The universe is finite. Red shift suggests that the universe is expanding; this would not be possible by definition unless the universe is finite, i.e. the universe must have a physical boundary by definition in order to be expanding. “Universe” and “space-time” are used interchangeably.
2. Given every specific initial condition of a finite system in space-time (to include space-time itself), the number of possible outcomes of that system under those conditions is finite, each with its own probability/likelihood, some of which may be greater/less than or equal to others in magnitude.
IV. Extrapolation.
1. If the universe is finite, then any subsystem within the universe (as well as the number of subsystems within the universe) is finite.
2. It follows that, for instance, the development & progression of the Solar System (as well as everything in it) is one of a finite number of possible outcomes for the specific initial conditions that must have existed at its beginning.
V. Expansion.
1. Given the laws of thermodynamics, the law of the conservation of energy, the law of the conservation of momentum, and other scientific laws (NOT theories, but laws), the most likely outcomes or outcome conditions tend to be the most energetically/kinetically/thermodynamically/etc. favored outcomes of specific initial space-time conditions.
2. It follows, then, that the current state of space-time (and by extension that of the Solar System and everything in it) is the most likely outcome/resultant set of conditions arising from the specific initial conditions of space-time (i.e. those just prior to and at the Big Bang).
3. The suggestion that this is not so necessitates the intervention of a force beyond space-time and/or a multi-universe/parallel universe construct. (Even if the previous point is true, it does not obviate the presence of a force beyond space-time, or a “Prime Mover.”) The multi/parallel universe construct is possible if and only if every pathway/process within the universe is completely reversible (to include the time element) to permit trans-universe traversal (otherwise the parallel universe construct cannot ever be demonstrated) and it also requires the simultaneous progression of at least two distinct (regardless of the likelihoods of occurrence) pathways from a single space-time origin. As such, the development of parallel and simultaneously-existing instances of space-time originating from a single point of divergence is either unprovable or impossible.
VI. Self-Agency.
1. Therefore, the formation of humanity and its progression, even down to individual choices, may be inevitable, i.e. the most likely outcome based on the initial physical conditions at every point of potential divergence. When applied to individual human choices/decisions, choices/decisions may be the most likely outcome of a set of biochemical, physical, etc. conditions initially present, and as such may not be “true” choices at all.
2. However, probabilistic choices may be recognized as “true” choices when conditions become arranged such that the likelihoods of every choice within a set of choices at a particular point of divergence (the point of decision) are exactly equal. When probability favors no single choice or set of choices, the only force that ultimately prompts space-time progression at the level of individual choice (i.e. the only force that ultimately decides which of the equally likely choices is in fact chosen), even if that progression takes the form of inaction or indecision, must be self-agency or free will. Even if such a set of conditions has never occurred in the history of all space-time, the possibility exists; so long as the possibility exists, so must free agency/free will and choice remains real, not illusory.
