Determined to be Undetermined

Determinism is one of those curious catch-22-esque systems that seems more believable (though not necessarily more reasonable) when you don't believe in it. How, you say? It works something like this: you argue that a system being proposed to be universal does not apply to you. The proponent responds by telling you that that's what you're supposed to think--that everyone has been confused/persuaded/fooled into thinking that they're not part of the system. That the proverbial wool has been pulled over the eyes of society at large, if you will. You then realize that perhaps, yes, you have been fooled. Angered slightly by the very idea at being fooled, you then must either launch a salvo of objective arguments at the idea in defense of your own standpoint (and hope that your counterpart doesn't have countermeasures), put up a wall of forced apathy, or watch as your own belief crumbles away under the force of the other's superior concept. The second of those options happens most often these days--people care not to think about new ideas that are at odds with their own. But the point still stands--the very idea that you might be being fooled by your own will causes people to begin to doubt their own standpoints.

As I typically do in entries such as this, for the benefit of those of you just joining us, I shall now define the topic at hand. Determinism is the concept that all of our actions are caused by outside forces/occurrences, as well as certain forces within ourselves. In short, we have no control over our actions, as they are determined by outside causes (which, in turn, we cannot control). "But wait!" you say. "How can that be so? I choose to do things all the time!" Determinists, especially those of the "soft" grouping, argue that while you may believe your actions were your choice, both the action and your perceived "choice" were determined by other things. Sorry, but thanks for playing.
The inherent concept that must stand in order for determinism to function is that of causality--that one event does not occur unless a previous event and/or series of particular events occur first, forcing or enabling it to happen. This is, in turn, one of the main attack points for those who are more vigorously opposed to determinism. Causality must be proven, and if even one deviation takes place, the causal argument is markedly weakened--and with it, determinism. (This is where indeterminists jump in, brandishing the Heisenberg uncertainty principle like a small boy with a toy sword after devouring a high-sugar, artifically-colored comestible. But that is a can of kippered snacks for another time entirely.)

Curiously enough, Christianity, a major proponent of choosing to do the right thing, is not entirely unconducive to determinism. Pointing to the omniscience and omnipotence of God, determistic Christians will argue something along the following lines: "If God knows everything that's going to happen, and He has all the power in the world to change it, He has decided that things will happen a certain way whether we want it to or not. Therefore, we are all determined by His omniscience, omnipotence, and will to do whatever He wants to happen." This is a tenet of Calvinism and other sects, typically referred to as predestination. Just as forceful, yet, are those who argued that God created us with free will, and thus even though he knows what will happen (or whatever could happen given all the circumstances taking place--which he also knows--and can choose whether to intervene or not at any given time), our choices are still our own. This issue divides people every which-way, even within the same sect, but these people typically don't experience the deep schisms that other disagreements could cause.

And myself? I don't really buy it. Yes, I know, I could be amongst the dissenting ignorants, but I don't really think that I have no choice in what I do. I think too much, and thoughts don't really need much of a provocation. There's too much being proposed by determinists that can't really be proven...that said, I still think that things in the world may influence my decisions--but they don't outright determine them, leaving me no say in the matter. And so, one could say I am determined to not be.