Causalism not Determinism and Some Ruminations on Free Will

One problem I have in accepting determinism is the word determinism. Determinism implies a determiner which assumes some sort of agency. This makes sense due to the roots of determinism being either religious or scientific. From the religious perspective all actions are pre-determined by a deity agent and from the scientific perspective knowledge is gained from observation from human agents. Determinism from the scientific point of view is based on cause and effect and the lacking of true human agency in the equation. Humans are simply subject to prior causes and the effects cascade toward more cause and effect chains. This would be better described as "Causalism", not determinism.

Because determinism rests of the concept of knowable causal forces it is simpler and more objection to call it causalism. If causality can be mapped with perfection then the future would, presumably, be predicted but not determined. Determination seems like inevitability based on an agent's word instead of an objective assessment of what physical forces should do. The future doesn't exist and I believed that no matter how precise we can observe reality there would likely be missing data, error, or other mysterious forces such as underlying quantum chaos that would make perfect knowledge and predictability impossible. We might get to 99.9% but it still wouldn't be determined, just very accurately predicted.

Are all physical forces consistent, constant and reliable? I am not sure. While logic has taught us to rely on physics due to it's reliable predictive power it doesn't mean that there is some room for variation and change. The universe is mysterious and science is a fairly new discipline. We should not be so vein to think that we understand what is immutable. For example, if the speed of light is not fixed then many calculations would be wrong. We should be skeptical about our assumptions. This is an interesting TedTalk about the potential misconceptions in science. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TerTgDEgUE

This doesn't mean we should discount science. The scientific method is certainly the best way to test truth claims about reality but I think there is room for philosophy as well.

Ruminations on Free Will:
Why can't a mind be a direct cause of an effect? If so why can't the agent, who owns the mind, be in control (choice) of that cause? Free will may lie somewhere in the chaos of the mind or somewhere in the conscious effort to change the future. The mind is just as physical as genetics and environment so why can't it have a discreet effect on reality and the future?

If all causes are products of prior effects and causes then can there be a first cause? This seems to lead toward a deity outside of time and space. The "turtles all the way down" argument doesn't lead anywhere.

If causes and effects can occur spontaneously or arise from complexity then the mind seems like a prime candidate for a machine capable of creating new chains of causation.

I do admit that I want Free Will to exist. I think it allows for more personal responsibility and change and I feel that I am free to make certain decisions. I do not believe in complete freedom and I admit that most actions are a product of prior or current physical forces acting inside and outside of myself that I can not control. But in those few moments where choice comes into play, and I can slow down and see the potential outcomes of an action I believe that "I" am free to choose. This may be rare and training myself to recognize them may be a lifelong discipline but it seems to increase my well being.

Here is a great conversation between Sam Harris and Dan Dennett about this topic:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFa7vFkVy4g
Check out Sam Harris's podcast for great content here:
https://www.samharris.org/podcast

This is a great talk between Sam Harris and David Deutsch about the power of explanation and the limits of knowledge:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J21QuHrIqXg

Religious rants and the word god.

Religious rants and the word god.

 I am a poor Buddhist because I fear the quietness in my mind.

I am a poor Christian because I do not believe in old stories.

I am a horrible Muslim because I do not believe in old stories.

I am a horrible Mormon because I don’t trust white leaders.

I will never be a catholic because gold is gaudy and ridiculous.

I am not an atheist even though I do not believe in god. I actually have a problem with the word god. I don’t think it means anything and I think it can mean anything so it is useless. When someone thinks that they do not believe in god they are saying they do not believe in a word that has no real meaning. When you acknowledge that the word is blindingly ambiguous you can acquire better knowledge of what you are talking about.

Before there was a word god there was a concept of god. And that concept had a clear meaning the people using that word. But when they said it they did not say god. They said the word for god in their language and it was understood before anyone had to write it down. If you have a religion you think that you know what the word god means. You go to church and read books about your god but you do not know what that word means.

The concept of god came at a time when people had very few words and the word god was powerful and deep. In each culture a new concept would emerge that described important and powerful things and soon the concept turned into worship and adoration. Some people built statues and monuments to celebrate their gods; their concepts. To some, gods had to be named and organized and for some god is one thing and for others god means everything or is it nothing and to some it means the earth and yet to some others it means the sun or moon or money or sex or fame or anything. Seriously it is a useless word.

So when someone asks if I believe in god what do I say? Do I say I do not believe in god when I do not know what that word means?  I have concepts of things and names for things and I can be content to not know things and name things that I do not know things I do not know. I do not desire to do anything more than to try to know what others mean when they say the words god or gods and try to understand why it matters. I think that there are more precise and creative ways to explain things than to continue to use this word GOD.

I am a poor agnostic because I am unsure that there is an answer to be unsure of. Maybe even the placing of a yes or no designation to the existence of something is the first mistake. Seeking is not the mistake but maybe inferior words and thinking lead to useless things.