Anyone else... disappointed? [PT/BG spoilers]

[Bad Alias]

Is there a WOJ to that? That would be weird to me, considering free will sort of is part of our nature, it's what defines mortals in Dresdenverse.
Using free will as against of own nature in this regard is weird.

It's basically what Uriel says in The Warrior short story. Harry comments that Uriel's statement sounds a lot like predestination. Uriel responds that free will is very seldomly used. There's certainly WoJ on what free will is, but I don't have any specific one in mind.

The ability to exercise free will is what defines mortals in the Dresdenverse. The use of that ability is different than possession of that ability. Uriel says the use is rare.

But why do we assume there is not like basic universe where Harry did X?

Because if there was, then free will is greatly cheapened, and the whole point of my theory/head canon is to avoid that.

Also - overall it seems to me Dresden had not done anything against his very character in GP.

I agree, but we'd have to know what decision was made in the mirrorverse to start making good guesses as to what the different options were.

It might be that every time Harry should be down and out for the count and he gets back up to win the day, that's him exercising his free will. And Harry does that at least once a book. Often times more. Maybe we're watching a Harry who makes Choices left and right, so it seems that his defiance of the odds and grim determination is him acting in accordance with his nature, but it's him exercising free will.

But then you seems to consider that you "exercise" free will only when you act against yourself.

Not against yourself, but against your nature. Acting against your nature isn't the same thing as acting against yourself. Acting in accordance with your nature is often detrimental. An addict acting against his nature is a very good thing.

[Wicked Woodpecker of West]

Because if there was, then free will is greatly cheapened, and the whole point of my theory/head canon is to avoid that.

Is it? I mean if any time free will can be used - all possible itterations creates new universe then it seems logical one of those itterations is - ABSTAIN from using it - and going with the flow. Not doing something when you can is ALSO a choice in itself.

You can choice to swim against the flow... or with it.
TBH very well choice Dresden did in Grave Peril was exactly NATURAL choice - in accord of what we know of his inner mechanisms, but he could... well betray himself.

The ability to exercise free will is what defines mortals in the Dresdenverse. The use of that ability is different than possession of that ability. Uriel says the use is rare.

Indeed, but he also point to several uses of it by Dresden alone in "Warrior".
So "seldom" used by him does not seems to be "rare" - just well - way less often that people thinks.

Not against yourself, but against your nature. Acting against your nature isn't the same thing as acting against yourself. Acting in accordance with your nature is often detrimental. An addict acting against his nature is a very good thing.

That's quite odd definition of nature, I have to say.

[Arjan]

That's quite odd definition of nature, I have to say.

I would say acting against your nature is acting against your emotional makeup, against your instincts. It is based on the idea that animals (and supernatural beings) have only instincts and never act against their nature while humans are unique in having a soul, free will (and maybe superior intelligence) and can act against their animal base instinct because of higher motivations and because they want to be more than their animal self.

Basically human exceptionalism. And then the white council decides who is human. Kincaid takes offense.

[morriswalters]

Harry has chosen how he would live.  Making choices which damage that perception of self would change him for the worse.

[Mira]

Harry has chosen how he would live.  Making choices which damage that perception of self would change him for the worse.

I agree with that, it is that perception of himself which makes up the strength of his will. 

[Arjan]

Harry has chosen how he would live.  Making choices which damage that perception of self would change him for the worse.

That gets us back to Lea definition of shame from changes.

[Wicked Woodpecker of West]

I would say acting against your nature is acting against your emotional makeup, against your instincts. It is based on the idea that animals (and supernatural beings) have only instincts and never act against their nature while humans are unique in having a soul, free will (and maybe superior intelligence) and can act against their animal base instinct because of higher motivations and because they want to be more than their animal self.

Indeed it seems to work that way - still if choice is possible - that is when our intellect shows us possibility of choice - as there are many actions done on instinct when such choice is just not presented to self, then following your emotional instincts is still a choice - choice of not enforcing own will over own feelings. If there is real posibility to make different choices - then following your guts is always one of them - there is no CHOICELESS option as Bad Alias seems to suggest.

Harry has chosen how he would live.  Making choices which damage that perception of self would change him for the worse.

Indeed. Considering how much of fake guilt he bears, real one that would be hard.

[Mira]

ndeed it seems to work that way - still if choice is possible - that is when our intellect shows us possibility of choice - as there are many actions done on instinct when such choice is just not presented to self, then following your emotional instincts is still a choice - choice of not enforcing own will over own feelings. If there is real posibility to make different choices - then following your guts is always one of them - there is no CHOICELESS option as Bad Alias seems to suggest.

But that is the tricky part, isn't it?   We can go with our gut, which usually is an emotional choice.  Or we can think it through, then make a choice which is more intellectual.  Choice can enforce one's will over one's feelings, rightly or wrongly.   While yes, there is always a choice, but sometimes it really makes no difference.

[Wicked Woodpecker of West]

Well indeed. I'm just pointing that following "gut" is just as choice-y as overcoming it, and if choice is possible, like really possible it should count as splitting decision.

[Bad Alias]

Is it[free will cheapened]? I mean if any time free will can be used - all possible itterations creates new universe then it seems logical one of those itterations is - ABSTAIN from using it - and going with the flow. Not doing something when you can is ALSO a choice in itself.

You said so.

I must say Butcher teasing multiverse is the WORST.
I can accept few splited timeline, but when according to WOJ each choice split reality it cheapens free will imensely. I mean literally that makes free will some bizzare mechanism to produce more alternative universes, not a real power of choice

Emphasis added.

Indeed, but he also point to several uses of it by Dresden alone in "Warrior".
So "seldom" used by him does not seems to be "rare" - just well - way less often that people thinks.

Who said Harry seldom uses his free will? Humans seldomly use free will.

That's quite odd definition of nature, I have to say.

I'd say your's is an odd definition of against. It's often in one's best interest to act against one's nature.

I would say acting against your nature is acting against your emotional makeup, against your instincts. It is based on the idea that animals (and supernatural beings) have only instincts and never act against their nature while humans are unique in having a soul, free will (and maybe superior intelligence) and can act against their animal base instinct because of higher motivations and because they want to be more than their animal self.

I disagree with the intellect over emotion/instinct definition of free will. I'd more say free will is the ability to actually make a choice as opposed to a deterministic and mechanical view of reality in which we just respond to cause with effect, whether emotionally or intellectually.

there is no CHOICELESS option as Bad Alias seems to suggest.

I'm suggesting that in Harry's world as laid out by Jim Butcher, people can not exercise their free will because that's what Uriel seems to say in The Warrior.

"That smells an awful lot like predestination to me. What if those people choose something different?

"It's a complex issue," Jake admitted. "But think of the course of the future as, oh, flowing water. If you know the lay of the land, you can make a good guess where it's going. Now, someone can always come along and dig a ditch and change that flow of water-but honestly, you'd be shocked how seldom people truly choose to exercise their will within their lives."

Now, one can argue what Uriel means by "truly" exercising free will is that acting in accord with one's nature, while an exercise of free will, isn't any different than if one didn't have free will in the first place.

WoJ on Free Will Creating Parallel Universes:

(click to show/hide)

One of my favorite parts of your novels are the divine and the demonic, and kind of how they offer (?) each other, and how they have rules, and I wanted to ask, what made you decide that Chicago wasn’t enough, that all of Creation has to be at stake?
Well, it’s not all of Creation.  It’s just all of THIS Creation. We haven’t really pulled the camera back far enough yet.  There’s a lot of reality in the Dresden Files. The Dresden Files is a universe that is driven by Free Will, and every time you make a choice, it creates a new universe.  So, there’s this vast spectrum of universe out there, and it’s not just ours, there’s causality going off in every direction.  So a philosophical war on that scale is something that is just so tremendous you can barely imagine it.  And while it dwarfs into unimportance our particular universe, at the same time, the only way to win that war is one choice at a time, one person at a time. And that’s really what’s going on at the level where the angels are operating, that’s what they’re concerned about.  On the level where Dresden’s operating, its like, “How can I survive until the next chapter?” and that’s sort of the problem that we’ve got, as people, how do we look out and try to fix the things that are wrong with our world, when we’re basically going, “How do I get to the next chapter?”  How can we have that longer view point, do we need it?  I don’t know the answers to questions like that, but I enjoy the hell out of torturing Dresden with them!  That’s really kind of the point of what I do. (Emphasis added).

If everything is a choice and every choice results in a reality where the consequences of that choice plays out, does free will even exist? Every choice must be made, so no choice is volitional. If it's not volitional, it's not a choice. Thus if everything is a choice and:

each choice split reality[,] it cheapens free will imensely. I mean literally that makes free will some bizzare mechanism to produce more alternative universes, not a real power of choice

[Mira]

Well indeed. I'm just pointing that following "gut" is just as choice-y as overcoming it, and if choice is possible, like really possible it should count as splitting decision.

Yes, and that is the paradox, often "choice," is a split decision between what our gut tells us and what our head tells us.  It gets more complicated because both have a rippling effect of consequences for yourself and for others.. You can also make a horrible choice either with your gut or your head and feel good about it, even if the choice was a very wrong one.

[Arjan]

I disagree with the intellect over emotion/instinct definition of free will. I'd more say free will is the ability to actually make a choice as opposed to a deterministic and mechanical view of reality in which we just respond to cause with effect, whether emotionally or intellectually.

It seems inevitable because emotions are the expression of your nature which is linked with your spiritual power which is linked to your magic. Magic is strongly linked with emotions.

I'm suggesting that in Harry's world as laid out by Jim Butcher, people can not exercise their free will because that's what Uriel seems to say in The Warrior.

Now, one can argue what Uriel means by "truly" exercising free will is that acting in accord with one's nature, while an exercise of free will, isn't any different than if one didn't have free will in the first place.

All humans can but they don't often do so. That is what he said.

WoJ on Free Will Creating Parallel Universes:

(click to show/hide)

One of my favorite parts of your novels are the divine and the demonic, and kind of how they offer (?) each other, and how they have rules, and I wanted to ask, what made you decide that Chicago wasn’t enough, that all of Creation has to be at stake?
Well, it’s not all of Creation.  It’s just all of THIS Creation. We haven’t really pulled the camera back far enough yet.  There’s a lot of reality in the Dresden Files. The Dresden Files is a universe that is driven by Free Will, and every time you make a choice, it creates a new universe.  So, there’s this vast spectrum of universe out there, and it’s not just ours, there’s causality going off in every direction.  So a philosophical war on that scale is something that is just so tremendous you can barely imagine it.  And while it dwarfs into unimportance our particular universe, at the same time, the only way to win that war is one choice at a time, one person at a time. And that’s really what’s going on at the level where the angels are operating, that’s what they’re concerned about.  On the level where Dresden’s operating, its like, “How can I survive until the next chapter?” and that’s sort of the problem that we’ve got, as people, how do we look out and try to fix the things that are wrong with our world, when we’re basically going, “How do I get to the next chapter?”  How can we have that longer view point, do we need it?  I don’t know the answers to questions like that, but I enjoy the hell out of torturing Dresden with them!  That’s really kind of the point of what I do. (Emphasis added).

If everything is a choice and every choice results in a reality where the consequences of that choice plays out, does free will even exist? Every choice must be made, so no choice is volitional. If it's not volitional, it's not a choice. Thus if everything is a choice and:

[Wicked Woodpecker of West]

Emphasis added.

Yes, but it helps... nothing from my perspective. If Dresden using free will means all possible uses are enforced and split universe in two or more, then  leaving natural choice out of equation, changes nothing because still choice is more like shtick to make more universes than REAL choice. Because ALWAYS all choices will happen and person will split in all AU versions of himself.
It helps in no way really - because still it's not one unique Dresden making one unique choice that cannot be changed and shall change fate of the universe - it's all possible Dresdens doing all possible choices. Which matters from perspective of specific split!Dresdens but not from multiverse perspective - not from Creation perspective which holds all possible Dresdens.

So if choice is not really unique I see no reason to exclude natural choices - it's just make things unecessary convoluted and do not solve problem of uniqueness of Harry Dresden at all. Oh, look it's just one AU Dresden from 15 less. Great, now I feel our Dresden is so much more unique, dammit.

I'd say your's is an odd definition of against. It's often in one's best interest to act against one's nature.

That depends how you define nature. If just as pure biological emotions then sure - but human between free will and animalistic instincts there is like shit-ton of psychology in work.

I disagree with the intellect over emotion/instinct definition of free will. I'd more say free will is the ability to actually make a choice as opposed to a deterministic and mechanical view of reality in which we just respond to cause with effect, whether emotionally or intellectually.

But still it's limited by once intellect.
My view is - for human being able to exercise free will - his mind, his reason has to show him at least two believable alternatives. Two choices his brain can consider possible. Free will need to be based on lower perception - or there is no choice to talk about. Sometimes brain gives us really just one choice - and we just go with it. Sometimes it shows us two or more, then the game begins.
But if your brain shows your self two possible choices - then neither of those choices is like just emotional reaction determined by situation, otherwise alternative would be not presented by reason. So if there is a possible choice - then choice have to be taken, because our perception, our intellect puts us before two possible door at least. If our reason won't show us alternatives - choice is impossible, as there's only one mechanical mode of working. If it shows us alternatives then neither is like NATURAL and DETERMINED because choice was given, and neither is certain till choice is made.

If everything is a choice and every choice results in a reality where the consequences of that choice plays out, does free will even exist? Every choice must be made, so no choice is volitional. If it's not volitional, it's not a choice. Thus if everything is a choice and:

I understand it Alias. Just for me your solution does not make free will more expensive really.
Primo if you make choice against nature in your equation - but there is no alternative that is ALSO against nature, then only this one Choice is made, and universe won't split because natural choice is just dropped from equation. But if you have two choices against nature - all shall happen each time you use even one of them. And that's still cheapens what Dresden is doing - because for every choice there are other choices. Skipping natural won't help, it's still cheapened from cosmic perspective. There still will be hunderds or thousands of Dresden playing all those choices out.

So it's more like - Universe is almost determined but you can sometimes split it into multiple branches which destroys primeval line of determinism, not just make new branches, and so on, and so on, and so on. I somehow doubt it because we know even if people use free will seldom it's still enough to make helluva splits, and Mab warned that it's not a wise choice to split destiny.

In your equation - basic determined outcome is doomed, because free will shall destroy it.

I think in this moment we need to get in peace with simple answer: free will matters as a way to multiply Creation and therefore create choices in which well Reality is not eaten by Outsiders for instance. Which can be one of million branches for all we know. Nevertheless all shall be played and billions shall perish beyond Outer Gates.
And it matters from personal perspective of our Harry which is maybe one of possible Harrys and in the end all Harry's had to happen each time choice was given, but still he's unique because he's our hero, and go to hell Darth Dresden.

I can live with that, even if I'd prefer if Jim read less Marvel/DC

It seems inevitable because emotions are the expression of your nature which is linked with your spiritual power which is linked to your magic. Magic is strongly linked with emotions.

Intelect is too. Just Harry won't use it much in his spellcraft, so he cannot precisely disintegrate enemies for instance.

[Bad Alias]

If Dresden using free will means all possible uses are enforced ...

I've repeatedly said some number of universes are created that are less than all possible choices. To oversimplify my head canon, there are two universes created by every act of free will. One where the actor chooses to act one way and another where they choose to act in a different way. Each choice is a choice to act beyond and in opposition to what an otherwise accurate deterministic model of the Dresdenverse would have predicted.

If it shows us alternatives then neither is like NATURAL and DETERMINED because choice was given, and neither is certain till choice is made.

Determinists would say that the appearance of choice is an illusion and all biology, reason, thinking, etc. just boils down to physics.

But if you have two choices against nature - all shall happen each time you use even one of them. And that's still cheapens what Dresden is doing - because for every choice there are other choices.

What if there are thousands of possible choices and two universes result?

[morriswalters]

The problem with Free Will as Jim uses it, is that it is contrived and not subject to analysis. Thousands of choices got Harry to whatever point he gets to. By the time you get to whatever the event is, there really aren't any choices left to make, assuming that Dresden is who he is. You've already made them prior to that instant. Which is what Uriel is saying.

Carry on.