Robert Kane [i], argues that it is not necessary for all decisions to be undetermined but only that some do, so-called “Self Forming Actions”. For instance, a specific decision at a specific time may well be outside our control, however our propensities will have been formed by previous free choices for which we can be held strongly accountable. These actions form our character and our character causes our decisions.[91] [85 page 92]. Aristotle said something similar: “if a man is responsible for wicked acts that flow from his character, he must at some time in the past have been responsible for forming the wicked character from which these acts flow”[ii].
While this fits in with the “training the autopilot” model (Section 4), the problem about the origin of these Self-Forming Actions remains unanswered. For instance an example of a self-forming choice is given as: A business woman “is on her way to an important meeting when she observes an assault taking place in an alley. An inner struggle ensues between her conscience, to stop and call for help, and her career ambitions which tell her she cannot miss this meeting. She has to make an effort of will to overcome the temptation to go on. If she overcomes this temptation, it will be the result of her effort, but if she fails, it will be because she did not allow her effort to succeed. And this is due to the fact that, while she willed to overcome temptation, she also willed to fail, for quite different and incommensurable reasons. When we, like the woman, decide in such circumstances, and the indeterminate efforts we are making become determinate choices, we make one set of competing reasons or motives prevail over the others then and there by deciding.” There is no clear view of why the alleged self-forming choice is any more free than any other and is not the result of deterministic physics with some uncertainty due to random noise which tips the balance one way or another. Nor is it said what is meant by “willed” or “allowed” in this context. Making a decision is said to be the result of two networks pulling against each other. Which one wins might depend on noise or on will. This may lead to uncertainty but there is no mechanism for free choice.
This, too, leads to a dead end with merely the illusion of freedom.
iRobert Kane, “Responsibility, luck, and chance: Reflections on free will and determinism”, Journal of Philosophy 96 (5):217-40 (1999)
iiAristotle, “Nicomachean Ethics”