What's the proof that convinced you? — TheMadFool

For me, the primary proof is the materialist view, that at the bottom of things are inanimate subatomic particles going about their business, strictly adhering to laws of physics, determining where each particle goes from moment to moment. Quantum physics, at best, introduces randomness into the situation, but not free-will control of the particles movements. Higher level determinist arguments utilizing psychology or brain science do not conflict with subatomic view, and do themselves point independently to hard determinism, but its the materialist view upon which I rest my hat.

The Great Courses offers the lecture series "Great Philosophical Debates: Free Will and Determinism" taught by Shaun Nichols. About 20 lectures that are really well done. It covers various lines of inquiry. He is not trying to conclude one philosophy or another regarding free will, but just to explain in some detail what each approach means.

I just find that open minded inquiries into mysterious matters often end up putting you in a mental place you wouldn't have imagined previously, and with that comes a satisfaction of knowing a little better how the world works. It can be an enjoyable pursuit.

Without going into detail, I found several lines of inquiry led to the same hard determinist conclusion. Materialism makes the case for subatomic particles advancing moment to moment, and a psychological approach makes the case based on how we reason, and a brain science approach makes the case based on brain function. It all hangs together.

You say "Why hasn't the existence/nonexistence of free will been proven?" There is disagreement as to whether it has been proven or not. There may not be an overwhelming consensus, but it is an individual choice as to whether it has been proven or not. For me, it has been proven.

Agree with all said and would like to add... your belief or not in determinism won't affect how you live, because it is predetermined. Ok. However, if your path includes belief in determinism then it can affect significantly the path you must take in the future. For example, a true story... I used to feel angry at someone who did me a grave disservice. But when I started applying hard determinism I realized that person could not help doing what they did. I try to feel now, no anger, but a desire to act as to avoid any future problems like that. From anger to no anger so there are practical implications.

You said "That was the reason I stated that such terms need to be put forward with great care." So true. It was a different slant I took on defining "free will" that took me from compatibilist to hard determinist. If "free will" means you can weigh the pros and cons and then decide how to act, then I'm a compatibilist. But if "free will" means you could have done otherwise, then I'm a hard determinist. I think the later definition is the more meaningful as I believe it is what most people intuit when they speak casually of free will.

Hard determinism is where I find myself. Not soft or compatibilist. I'd leave open the small possibility of randomness, but that doesn't contribute to free will.

I’ve read and listen to a number of fascinating lectures and books on the topic. For me the case seems pretty clear it’s hard determinism. But I’m at a stage where I don’t yet know how to really integrate that with my daily life. So for now I live the illusion of free will and keep going along making the best decisions I can. I don’t like living in an Illusion so I’ll keep looking for a reasonable strategy. My search has brought me to this forum seeing if there are kindred souls :)