According to a research article written by Ethan Menchinger—a philosophy professor and author at the University of Toronto—about 60 percent of Americans believe that they have the capability of autonomously choosing their course of action when presented with a problem (Menchinger). However, if man’s actions are dictated by reason, does the concept of choice remain valid? Free will is a topic highly debated among philosophers, psychologists, and other intellectuals etc.; however, where did such an abstract concept come from, why was it brought into existence, and how does it continue to exist in world that is fully aware of reason being the driving force of man’s actions? The notion of free will is an illusion conceived by those who simply refuse to submit to the fact that they are at the eternal mercy of an uncontrollable universe and upheld by religion and the role that it plays in the justice system created by man. 

According to “Free Will,” an academic essay written by Lee Anne Peck, the origin of the “free will concept” can be traced back to ancient Greece where Greek philosophical thinkers, such as Aristotle, Democritus, Carneades etc., contemplated and recorded their thoughts on capabilities of mankind (Peck). Although no one knows with certainty where or who exactly was the first to purpose such a concept, the reason for its upbringing in ancient Greece is quite comprehensible (Peck). The Greeks are regarded as the first true thinkers of ancient western civilization. Whereas most early communities held rather primitive mindsets, often using gods and goddesses to explain the unknown, the Greeks transcended this way of thinking and shifted their focus to what man could physically perceive in order to understand life’s complexities. In other words, they empowered man and his capabilities, rather than empowering supernatural forces that could not be quantified or fully understood. “The Odyssey,” an epic poem written by Homer—one of ancient Greece’s most renowned authors—is an excellent example of this shift. In this poem, the protagonist, Odysseus, sets out on a ten-year journey to rejoin his family in his homeland, Ithaca, and reclaim his status as king. While on his expedition, Odysseus encounters a number of impediments ranging from monsters and natural obstructions to the gods themselves. However, in the end Odysseus conquers all and returns to his family in Ithaca, and, although receiving occasional aid from the goddess Athena, he demonstrates man’s strength and cunning while also displaying his will to proceed no matter the obstacle. With such a shift in focus towards the faculty of the human being, free will—which is defined as “the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one’s own discretion”—was the next logical step towards empowering mankind. The ability to choose one’s course of action was an idea prized by the Greeks who valued the autonomy of man (Peck). Although many Greeks continued to believe in the idea of a predetermined fate, they believed that one had the freedom to choose how to arrive at their fate (Peck). According to Peck, the Greeks believed that life had many paths all leading to the same destination, and that one had the innate ability to choose which path to take (Peck). However, in later years, even the idea of predetermined fate would be abandoned by more modern day societies giving man the ability to control his own fate. 

How does a concept that is over 2000 years old and hinders on the edge of validity continue to play such a major role in today’s society? In contrast to its Hellenistic background, the definition of free will has changed in order to satisfy the perception of contemporary societies. Religion, which had previously placed the man’s destiny in the hands of deities, not only abstained from retracing man’s ability to choose his own destiny, but support it. In other words, religion has encompassed the notion of free will—possibly in an attempt to attract more participants—and has encouraged its members to use it in accordance to the its moral guidelines.  Christianity, for example, recognizes man’s ability to act autonomously, claiming that God granted man free will and should he use it in accordance to the word of God, heaven shall be his eternal home after death (). By uniting with religion, the “free will concept” have withstood the test of time and continues to be a prominent topic for debate even till this day.  

Not only does religion play a role in the continued existence of free will, according to "Free Will and Law: Toward a Pragmatic Approach”—a research article written by Gregg Simmons—the legal system set in place to punish individuals for their transgressions may also play a role in sustaining the concept. In his article, Simmons recounts the integration of philosophical principles into modern justice systems. In doing so, he reveals a pragmatic use for the notion of free will and how it has and still is being used today. According to Simmons, free will makes one accountable for his/her actions, because it dictates that each individual has the ability to choose rather or not to break the law and should be judged and punished accordingly. In concluding his article, Simmons hypothesizes on a hypothetical situation where the world is void of any concept of free will. In this world, he exclaims that no one would be responsible for their action—good nor bad—thus no one could be punished nor praised for deeds. In order to prevent such an occurrence, Simmons concludes that free will becomes a necessary commodity, one that upholds a just society. Simmons conclusion provides yet another reason as to why the “free will concept” continues to thrive in today’s society.

Although religion and its ability to be exploited by societal justice systems are feasible reasons as to why free will continues to remain such a pertinent topic, according to “The Illusion of Consciousness”—a Ted Talk video with speaker Dan Dennett who is a philosophy professor—the “idea of control” is the most appealing aspect of free will. According to Dennett, the “idea of control” is what separates human beings from the rest of the world. Human’s capacity to operate outside of necessity and animalistic instincts drove the concept of free will into existence and has contributed to maintaining its existence ever since, says Dennett. This assumption is consistent with a survey taken for a research article written by Ethan Menchinger— called "Free Will, Predestination, and the Fate of the Ottoman Empire”—which asked the question “Do you believe in free will and why?” According to his results almost 60% of individuals admitted to believing in free will and about 53% of those individuals justified their belief with an answer related to having control over one’s actions and/or destiny (Menchinger). The rest either held religious or cultural beliefs that required them to believe in free will or confessed that they did not know why they believed in free will (Menchinger). Menchinger’s survey suggests a correlation between the desire to be in control and the belief in free will. 

As John leaves his home for school, a cool winter’s breeze reminds him that he should carry a jacket today. So, he returns to his home, proceeds to his room, and grabs his jacket from his coat closet. John’s actions, although simplistic in nature, demonstrate a centuries old Greek concept which is that every occurrence has a reason for occurring (Crescioni). According to psychologist Will Crescioni, reasons the “dictator of man,” because the summation of reasons produce man’s state of mind which in turn produces man’s actions (Crescioni). Because human beings operate within the confines of reason, and given that it is impossible for them to commit an action without it, humans do not choose their course of action, thus the concept of free will is invalid. In the previous example, each one of John’s actions was commanded by reason. John returned to his home because he was cold and in need of a jacket. Him needing a jacket an knowing its location were the reasons for John returning to his home. According to Crescioni, every event occurs in this particular manner. However, this is but a simplistic example of how reasons dictate one’s choice. In reality, there are a number of factors that goes into influencing one’s decisions, such as environment upbringings and genetic predispositions. For example, if a child is raised in an environment that does not place value in education, then that individual is less likely to make decisions to further their education in the future. Similarly, if an individual has a gene that causes him/her to be hyperactive, then he/she is likely to make rash decisions.

The thought of one being in control of his/her actions is an appealing sentiment that many people receive pleasure from. It allows for humans to be separate themselves from the rest of the world and contributes a sense of uniqueness. Not only does it appeal to human’s state of mind, the concept can also be manipulated and utilized in order to create a legal system that forces individuals to remain compliant with manmade laws. It can also be used to attract members to a particular religious affiliation. In short, although free will does have many desirable applications and is appealing to the minds of mankind, it is simply irrational to believe in anything that does not comply with reason. 
