Free Will and Determinism

Free will is having the will, the option, to do something. In no way does this imply that we are free of consequences. Many falsely view that being free of consequences is intrinsically linked with free will, as 'If I had free will, I could kill and get away with it' is often cited in classroom discussions. This is vital to understand before embarking on the journey of free will and determinism, because otherwise the misconception leads people astray.

When discussing free will and determinism, people no longer discuss which one is correct, but rather whether they are compatible or incompatible. To begin, definitions are needed.
   Free will is having the will, or the option, to do otherwise. In other words, whether another course of action is possible. For example, if I were crossing the road, it is possible for me to walk out in front of the car, and it is equally possible that I would wait for the car to pass before crossing. The possibility for each action is present. Some may argue that if I were in a stable mind set, I would never walk out in front of the car, but it doesn't make the act any less possible. Less actual, yes, but not less possible.
   Determinism, on the other hand, is where genetic, environmental, physical, sexual, biological e.c.t factors mean that only one course of action is possible, meaning that there could only ever be one actual outcome. So if I walked out in front of the car, it was because I had been brought up not to bother with what goes on around me. A simplistic example, I know, but it demonstrates the concept adequately.
   Linguistically, then, free will and determinism are incompatible. It would paradoxical to say that multiple possible outcomes and one possible outcome could coexist.
   However, many view that each view provides something to the debate, so perhaps new definitions are needed. All the factors that deterministic talk about, the genetic, environmental et al., they do influence a person's actions, but many believe that there is still a degree of free will, in that we are constrained by these factors but not truly limited. So, these factors all make some possibilities more possible than others. This is called Soft Determinism. Though, maybe just because I like the idea of being morally responsible for my actions, I would like to call this 'Soft Free Will'.
   So are free will and determinism compatible? Linguistically not so, though the process behind the outcomes, that is why there is only one/many possibilities, are compatible, in that we can be constrained to a degree and yet we can still choose. Environmental factors may mean that I am more likely to not pay attention to the road, though I could still decide that it is a good idea.