People's behaviour is largely determined by forces not of their own making.

The debate between determinism and free will have intrigued us since times immemorial.

An oft-referred example is that of the prophecy of Oedipus. The prophecy was he would kill his father and marry his own mother. Fearing such a tragic ending, his father deserted Oedipus in a remote far-away place so that they never come in contact. He was raised by a different family and knew of the prophecy. He took on a journey to leave his adoptees so that the prophecy does not get fulfilled. But, eventually, he finds himself fighting his biological father in some dispute, not knowing who he was. Oedipus marries his mother. So despite efforts to have a different turn of events, the prophecy is fulfilled. The question prevails are we guided by our fate or do we have actual free will.

In the most auspicious of Hindu texts, the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna (the avatar of Vishnu) tells he can see the past, the present and the future. He knows the ultimate aftermath of the massive battle between the Pandavas and the Kauravas, yet, he urges hesitant Arjun to rise and use the free will to tend his responsibilities / Dharma as a soldier.

A famous Vedantic scholar, Swami Vivekananda, told free will cannot exist under time and space constraints. Only with deliberate effort we can break out of such constraints and reach beyond the universe.

Scientifically, we haven’t made the enough progress to fully understand the inner workings of our consciousness. Yet, our brain is still made up of physical objects. So, everything should follow nature’s law of cause and effect.

A common problem that baffles both quantum physicists and computer scientists is making a random number generator. Is entropy actually random, when the very choice of tossing a coin is based on some past causes? Is not everything that happens in the universe the after-effects of the Big Bang that happened billions of years ago?

We do not have strong reasons to believe that free will truly exist. However, our moral code of conduct and the entire system of justice is based on free will. Good behaviour is praise-worthy, while bad behaviour should be met with harsh treatment.

In the late 20th century, a case of a middle-aged man developing paedophilic tendencies was being judged for molesting his step-child. He defended himself saying his head was hurting too much and that caused the crime. On medical diagnosis, it was found he had developed a brain tumour indeed. On removal of the tumour, his afflictions reduced. Not after too long, another tumour developed and he started showing paedophilic habits again. Did the medical condition cause it or could he have exercised his free will?

Compatibilists try to provide a middle-ground to the debate. Though they agree action is based on past events, a person has the moral responsibility for his own actions. Can a person blame his peers for the smoking habit he picked up when the decision to not indulge was his own free will?

I concur with compatibilists, as in people’s behaviour, external factors are determined, but as an evolved species, we do have a certain amount of free will. The people believing in free will may appear naive. Nevertheless, this sense of naivety and fool-hardiness lead us to ambition, which is the backbone of any progress we have made as humans. Without this faith, we will spiral down to a chaotic situation of bleakness and lawlessness.