{"id":1319,"date":"2025-08-10T16:45:00","date_gmt":"2025-08-10T14:45:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/laurentchani.com\/?p=1153"},"modified":"2025-09-15T15:53:41","modified_gmt":"2025-09-15T13:53:41","slug":"free-will-versus-inevitable-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/laurentchani.fr\/en\/le-libre-arbitre-versus-linevitable-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Free Will versus Inevitability"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Laurent<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

THE free will<\/strong> was one of the starting points of my writing project<\/strong>,
It was accompanied by the desire to explore what could become of thehumanity<\/strong> in a near future<\/strong> which, however, I will not know in my lifetime. Certainly, the subject is nothing original. Robert A. Heinlein<\/strong>, one of the pioneers in the field, had already outlined a "history of the future"<\/strong> since 1950. We could cite another author that I do not know and who makes projections of the future of man.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For me, the free will<\/strong> opens an almost infinite set of paths<\/strong> that theindividual<\/strong> can borrow, as opposed to what the destiny<\/strong> or theinevitable<\/strong> imposes. I would be stating the obvious by recalling that, as the dead<\/strong>, there destiny<\/strong> is inevitable. What we ignore at every moment of our conscious life<\/strong>, it is the " how "<\/strong> and the " When "<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let's take a trivial example: the return journey after a day of work<\/strong>. Out of habit, we always follow the same path<\/strong> without even thinking about it. One evening, however, instead of taking the road<\/strong> from the right, we turn left: we have to buy some bread<\/strong>. This change<\/strong> will not prevent us, unless something unforeseen happens, from finishing the evening at home.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What I'm getting at is that we don't choose our Place of birth<\/strong>, nor our parents<\/strong>, nor the Company<\/strong> that shapes us. But we have, to a certain extent, the ability<\/strong> to make our own choices<\/strong>, in other words to take our fate<\/strong> in hand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

THE theme<\/strong> crosses the whole literature<\/strong>, Since "The Iliad"<\/strong> ofHomer<\/strong>, where the gods<\/strong> interfere in business human<\/strong> while leaving to the hero<\/strong> a part of free will<\/strong>, up to more recent works. I could cite "1984"<\/strong> ofOrwell<\/strong>, but I prefer \u201cAn unsustainable world\u201d<\/strong> ofIra Levin<\/strong> (1970). This novel<\/strong> describes a perfect world<\/strong> where injections<\/strong> neutralize all will<\/strong>. One day, the hero<\/strong> transgresses the rules of a dystopian government system<\/strong>. By tracing the threads of the established order, he discovers those who maintain thebalance<\/strong> of this world under control<\/strong>. The latter offer him to sit on their table<\/strong>, the one where the planning is done destiny<\/strong> of thehumanity<\/strong>. So, Levin<\/strong> tells the storyhistory<\/strong> ofmen<\/strong> who believe themselves masters<\/strong> of their choice<\/strong>, while they are governed by a invisible and higher power<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

THE Foundation cycle<\/strong> ofIsaac Asimov<\/strong> struck me even more. His central concept<\/strong>, there psychohistory<\/strong>, postulates that, if each individual<\/strong> keeps a free will<\/strong>, L'evolution<\/strong> of thehumanity<\/strong> still follows a predetermined path<\/strong>, punctuated byinevitable steps<\/strong>. I would name these steps<\/strong> of the "knots of inevitability"<\/strong>. All individual<\/strong> has the free choice<\/strong> to move in theinterweaving<\/strong> of the companies<\/strong>. Yet, Foundation<\/strong> starts from the postulate that thehumanity<\/strong> will undergo crises<\/strong> to predetermined moments<\/strong> by this famous psychohistory<\/strong> that theauthor<\/strong> press one irrefutable scientific approach<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Free will<\/strong> and fate<\/strong> are therefore not necessarily incompatible<\/strong>. If I had to represent these two notions, I would imagine a three-dimensional space<\/strong>, extended by the dimension of time<\/strong>, to which I would add a fifth dimension<\/strong> : that of the sequence of events<\/strong>. I have not yet established whether this dimension<\/strong> East unique<\/strong> Or multiple<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My vision of the universe<\/strong>, which would be reduced to a three-dimensional diagram<\/strong>, would look like a infinite spiral of attached balloons<\/strong>. At the center of each one takes place, in spiral<\/strong>, a line<\/strong> representing the time<\/strong>, connecting each ball<\/strong> to the next by one node<\/strong>. To the surface<\/strong>, the events<\/strong> appear as shooting stars<\/strong> to light trails<\/strong> all intersecting in the same direction. In the end, these trajectories<\/strong> converge towards specific points<\/strong> : my knots of inevitability<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This idea<\/strong> came to me in my youth<\/strong>, when reading a pocket book<\/strong> of popularization<\/strong> of thehistory of astronomy<\/strong>. I discovered that two scientists<\/strong> had reached the same physical laws<\/strong> to the same era<\/strong> without knowing the works<\/strong> from each other. This was the case of Johannes Kepler<\/strong>, which establishes the laws governing the movement of the planets<\/strong>, and of Godefroy Wendelin<\/strong>, who independently obtained comparable results<\/strong>. Wendelin<\/strong>, a few years later, applied the Kepler's third law<\/strong> to Jupiter's satellites<\/strong>. It does not appear that he had direct knowledge of the works<\/strong> of Kepler<\/strong> when he undertook his calculations<\/strong>, And Kepler<\/strong>, for his part, never mentions Wendelin<\/strong> in his known writings<\/strong>. THE rapprochement<\/strong> between their works<\/strong> was established a posteriori by the historians of science<\/strong>, who found that Wendelin<\/strong> had confirmed, in a manner independent<\/strong>, part of the works<\/strong> of Kepler<\/strong> in a different context<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This type of intellectual coincidence<\/strong> is not uncommon. Thehistory of science<\/strong> is full of these convergence nodes<\/strong> where several spirits<\/strong>, isolated from each other, achieve similar discoveries<\/strong>. Among the most striking examples:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1. Infinitesimal Calculus<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n