What is your position on free will?

[Alcibiades]

I just want to say that this is a badly designed poll. The three options should be the three main positions on free will in contemporary philosophy: libertarianism (free will exists and determinism is false), compatibilism (free will exists and determinism is true), and hard determinism (free will doesn’t exist and determinism is true).

[Alcibiades]

As for my own answer, while I’m a bit more sceptical of compatibilism than Antonio is, I also struggle to see how a full-throated libertarian conception of free will is supposed to work: if our actions are not determined at all, then how can they really be free (in the sense that I think most people care about free will, as a necessary condition for moral responsibily)? If they just spontaneously, randomly happen (which is what a complete lack of casual determination seems to imply), it seems we cannot be held responsible for them.

[Alcibiades]

This may be a stupid question, but has "free will doesn't exist and determinism is false" ever been brought forth or explored as a position in philosophy?

Galen Strawson (of ‘most famous father-son duo in philosophy’ fame) has, in a sense (his position is actually that free will is incompatible with both determinism and indeterminism, and so it’s completely impossible).

Speaking more generally, one way this position could come about is by agreeing with a point that many compatibilists have made, and that I gestured towards in my post directly below the one you quoted, namely that free will may actually require determinism in some sense. Unlike the compatibilists though, such a philosopher would then say that determinism is in fact false, and thus that free will doesn’t exist. Their picture of the world would be one in which human action happens completely randomly and spontaneously, depriving us of any meaningful control over what we decide to do.