Does free will exist?

I think two posts above this (forgive my newbishness) the point is made of there being two options: that either an action is determined or it is random. To this notion, and in response to the thread...The action is made distinct, which is presumptuous; any entity is made distinct, by human perceptual tendencies. IMO there is a lot about this which is illusory. Abstract notions such as self, or any other perceived distinction in the universe, always beg the question, and are always (IMO) circular. Our reference for the existence of *something* is *something else*. Jack may have addressed this in what may be her/his typically lucid, and at the same time cryptic, manner... frankly, the question seems to me a nonquestion. Once you distinguish "we", you make an implied statement regarding its properties, including will.I don't as such believe any of us exists; only by extension do I also not believe in the existence of "free will" (wherein the party possessed of it is some variant of "we").

Mr Jack, sorry for not taking the initiative (re: gender) but I like to be unassuming. =)Re: topic... determined or random? It matters how the event is defined, and particularly when the event is presumed caused, it matters how the different "causative" entities are defined. Is not all material theory an otherwise arbitrary symbolic representation of reality in the most convenient/useful manner available?I posit that a human person does not exist, and that descriptions of "human" are rhetorical abstractions for their own sake. I would describe "consciousness", in turn, as a particular range of frequencies in the movement of the universe... not as distinct as it (predictably) seems to "us".[This message has been edited by atrejusan, 04-26-2004][This message has been edited by atrejusan, 04-26-2004]

---

It knows only that it needs, commander. But, like so many of us, it does not know what.
- Spock