Do we have free will?

Every decision feels like mine. I choose to write this sentence. I could just as easily close the laptop and go for a walk. At least, that’s what it feels like. But philosophers and theologians have been asking for centuries whether that feeling is real or an illusion.

On the surface, free will seems obvious. If I want tea instead of coffee, I boil the kettle. No cosmic force makes me pick Lipton over espresso. But then science barges in with unsettling news. Neuroscience experiments suggest our brains make decisions milliseconds before we become conscious of them. If that’s true, then who’s really in charge?

Religious perspectives take this further. In Christianity, free will is central: humans can choose good or evil, and moral responsibility depends on it. God knows all, but He gave people the capacity to act freely. Without that choice, concepts like sin, virtue, and redemption lose meaning. Islam has a more nuanced take: some schools emphasise divine predestination, while others stress human accountability. Free will is always balanced against omniscience or fate. Even in Hindu philosophy, karma ties actions to consequences across lifetimes, implying that choices are meaningful but embedded in a larger cosmic structure.

Then there’s determinism from secular philosophy. Every action is the inevitable outcome of prior causes. My “decision” to write this isn’t born in isolation. It’s the product of my upbringing, my culture, my mood, even what I had for breakfast. Stack those influences up, and suddenly the space for “me” to freely choose feels very small.

But here’s the twist. Even if determinism is true, does it negate responsibility? Maybe free will isn’t pure, absolute freedom from influence. Maybe it’s about ownership - acting through your own personality, values, and reasoning, even if causes guide the choice. Philosophers call this “compatibilism”: freedom exists not as total independence from causality but as the ability to act according to your desires and reason.

Ethics and religion intersect here. If humans aren’t free, can we blame them for wrongdoing? In Christianity, free will underpins moral accountability and the meaning of salvation. In secular thought, responsibility can survive as a social mechanism - it shapes behaviour even in a determined world. The question becomes not “do we act freely?” but “how do we understand our agency and its consequences?”

Philosophy never gives a final answer, but maybe that’s the point. Asking whether free will exists forces us to think about identity, morality, and what it means to be human. Science, religion, and philosophy all provide perspectives, each revealing limits and possibilities. Maybe the best we can do is act as if we are free, reflect on our choices, and learn from the tension between determinism and agency.

After all, I didn’t have to write this article. Or did I?