Pre-determinism negates free-will.
Let’s picture this; let’s describe the context. In a given context each element bounces off against others producing a certain effect. A cause or a combination of causes can produce only one (and only that) effect or a combination of effects. These effects
plus new actions become the cause(s) of new ‘pre-determined’ events.
If the above is true, then we can say that everything within this context is pre-determined i.e. an able analyst can take a snapshot of the context at a given time and will be able to accurately tell the past events that led to the current situation and be able to accurately predict future events based on the current situation.
Let’s discuss this “plus new actions” that has been struck off. These new actions is a result of what can be termed as ‘free-will’. These new actions can change the course of future events.
Can’t we have new actions? Yes we can will say the proponents of ‘free-will’. No we can’t will say the proponents of ‘pre-determinism’. I say both are right because the idea of free-will co-exists with the idea of pre-determinism; rather, one implies the other.
So, what’s the truth?
Stretch the arguments for pre-determinism and at some point you really can’t take it any further. I will not list the arguments here. The list is long. Same is the case with the arguments for free-will. You can’t talk about one without talking about the other. Both ideas form the context. Pre-determinism and free-will are the basis of the context in which a story is woven; our world is woven.
If ‘free-will’ and ‘pre-determinism’ are ideas that one cannot stand without the other, can I ever be free? At least, if you tell me that it’s all pre-determined, I am off the hook; I don’t need to worry about being free but if you tell there still is an element of ‘free-will’ then I don’t know what to make of it.
Isn’t there any way out? Yes, there is. Drop the context. And you have complete freedom; absolute freedom.