In his Tractatus
Logico-Philosophicus Wittgenstein wrote: “The world is independent of my
will.” (6.373) And he explains it by saying: “Even if everything we wished were
to happen, this would only be, so to speak, a favour of fate, for there is no
logical connexion between will and world, which would guarantee this, and the
assumed physical connexion itself we could not again will.” (6.374) But if this
were true, what then is the relation between my will and the world? Is my will
then outside the world and is it no part of this world? But this would mean
that there is a second world, which contains my will (for my will must exist
somewhere). And what is this second world then and what is the relation of my
will to it?
Moreover, we can apply Wittgenstein’s reasoning to
anything else: the existence of bikes, trees, rocks, and so on. (note the
wording, for Wittgenstein says: “The world is everything that is the case. The
world is the totality of facts, not of things.” 1.1.1) But what do we mean then
when we ask whether there is a free will? What does it mean then that some say
that experiments show that we first start to act and only then develop a will
to perform the action concerned? (Libet and Wegner, for instance) Reasoning in
Wittgenstein’s way, life would not be a part of the world, or at least not of
the “primary world” he talks of. And, whether we have a free will or whether we
haven’t (but I think we have, at least in some sense), what does acting then
involve if it doesn’t mean performing something in the world? There is only one
world, and will and willing are a part of it, as does everything there is.
No comments:
Post a Comment