I was always under the impression that most philosophers picked sides in some sort of trench warfare between free will and determinism. Happily, I found out that I am not alone in thinking that there is a bridge between these two views. There’s quite a large contingent of thinkers that call themselves compatibilists, including everyone's good buddy, Hume.

But I feel that my union between free will and determinism is on shaky ground. Objectively, the world appears to follow casual order of some sort, and to say that the agency inside a person’s skull is somehow independently making decisions suggests some kind of supernatural intervention. I don’t want to take that route because I am not aware of any evidence that is the case. Commonly I hear arguments that quantum physics leaves us with indeterminacy, but I always thought that was an epistemic problem of measurement, rather than an issue with causality itself. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that indeterminate measurement of the position/velocity of particles doesn’t mean that the universe as an indeterminate system.

Here’s where the shakiness comes in. I believe that perspective is very important. Subjectivity lies at the heart of all political opinion, every favorite food, each passionately felt emotion. My rational choices might be the result of casually linked neural action, but from my perspective they are all very much personal expressions of my will. From the metaphysical seat that my self sits, I cannot help but express will. It is a feature that I can’t help but realize. My choices are my own, even if they are a product of billions of years of particle and energy interactions. Because my small mind could not ever fully understand my determined branch of the universe, it is free. I am completely amazed by the thought that everything we will is built on a history that is deeply intricate.