I make this argument against absolute determinism, of course many things can be determined, specifically within classical physics.
what is determinism
Determinism: the doctrine that all events, including human action, are ultimately determined by causes external to the will. Some philosophers have taken determinism to imply that individual human beings have no free will and cannot be held morally responsible for their actions.
The belief that all possible outcomes are predetermined. This directly contradicts any belief in free will or human choice. Determinists not only believe that every possible outcome is predetermined, but also that, due to this claim, we can theoretically predict any possible outcome of any given situation. In other words there is no such thing as a random outcome.
My criticism
All human beings perceive choice
All human beings on the planet perceive having choices throughout there daily lives, they perceive choice in all of their actions, with the exception of certain reflexive actions like sneezing and inanimate behavior. Even if it were to be proven that choice is only an imaginary construct, or an illusion, we would not cease to perceive having a choice. Science is founded in careful observation, and all though science has been able to observe our perceptions being wrong, they have never succeed in changing the effects of our perceptions.
For example, Einsteins theory of relativity shows us many things that seem to completely contradict our perceptions, yet it does not change the fact that we are bound to those perceptions, with the exception of achieving some of the most impossible feats of physics. Like traveling at the speed of light. So all though relativity may be relevant to physics and how it studies the universe we reside in. It has little to no relevancy on our daily lives and actions.
Even though Einstein argued for determinism, he admitted that it was not a good reason to allow a murderer to go free. This is important because it is an obvious example of how we are still bound to our perceptions even if they are just illusions. Certain kinds of knowledge have no direct effect on how we perceive our immediate reality. So even if determinism is true, it is irrelevant to the extent of how we interact with our immediate surroundings.
Randomness is true
Einstein argued for determinism, he believed that all outcomes of any given situation could be predicted. He thought that things only appear random because we do not know all of the given variables in a situation. In other words, things only appear random when we are ignorant to all of the variables. However if we know all of the variables, then we can predict the outcome.
However Einstein was only around for the very beginning of quantum physics. And hidden variable theory has since been proven false by quantum physicist John Bell.
As an aside, it turns out that the absolute randomness comes from the fact that every result of every interaction is expressed in parallel universes (you can’t predict two or more mutually exclusive, yet simultaneous results).
See it explained here
Although we can not create true randomness inside of software, only pseudo-randomness, we now have random number generators that exploit physical processes. So we can actually generate true randomness using machines. Wikipedia: Hardware random number generators
There are other examples of true randomness in nature. This website will provide you with a truly random number gathered from atmospheric noise.
According to Machio Kaku, Physics ends the free will debate
Even it is true, how practicle is it to apply in our daily life
Even if we were able to prove that all outcomes are "preordained," unless we can consistently predict every outcome it is irrelevant to how we go about interacting with other humans. If we had a math equation to predict all outcomes, we would be able to look right into the future, then it would be relevant to us all. But unless that day comes, it is not so.
I'm not claiming that it is absolutely irrelevant, as it is relevant to science, but not relevant to us as individuals and the way we interact with each other, go about our day to day lives, and make decisions.
If determinism is true, it would be the best argument for absolute authority, but still a bad one
If we were able to predict all future outcomes of human action (this would most likely require knowledge of every possible variable in the universe), that would be the best argument possible for granting the people with this insight absolute dominance over all other individuals.
However it's still a bad argument, because it assumes that knowing the outcomes would give us the ability to change them. And if we could do that, determinism is false.
So even if we were to prove determinism true, it would be completely irrelevant. We wouldn't know what to do with that information. We would have no ability to interact with that information.
Why I believe it's important to value indeterminism
Praxeology
Praxeology (Gr. πρᾶξις (praxis) ″action″, λόγος (logos) ″talk, speech″) is the deductive study of human action based on the notion that humans engage in purposeful behavior, as opposed to reflexive behavior like sneezing and inanimate behavior.[1] According to its theorists, with the action axiom as the starting point, it is possible to draw conclusions about human behavior that are both objective and universal. For example, the notion that humans engage in acts of choice implies that they have preferences, and this must be true for anyone who exhibits intentional behavior. - wikipedia
If determinism were true, it would be the best argument for disregarding praxeology. However, just as in the instance of authority, just because it's the best argument doesn't make it a good argument.
Praxeology gives us very important insight on how to look at social phenomenon. Unlike other outlooks on social phenomenon, praxeology sees each individuals decisions and preferences as mathematically immeasurable. You can not form a mathematical formula that accurately depicts what is best for "society" as a whole, because you can not place cardinal numbers on an individuals preferences.
Each individual can only order their preferences. In other words, you can not say that you prefer a cabbage 6 and a potato 4. Only that you prefer the cabbage over the potato. Preferences are not accurately represented by cardinal numbers.
there is a common misunderstanding that a price equates to a cardinal representation of value. This is untrue. If a gallon of milk costs $5, that is not its value, it is the cost, and there is a very important difference.
The only two parties that can place value on the milk are the seller and the buyer, and the value is completely relative to these individuals preferences. The seller is claiming that the $5 is more valuable to him, and the buyer is claiming that the milk is more valuable than the $5. These are two completely contradictory preferences that can co-exist simultaneously. To determinism exists would be to say that there is an absolute value on the milk, and if we knew all of the variables we could find it. This would make value completely objective. However we know that to not be the case.
Conclusion
I see no solid evidence that a belief in determinism invalidates the practicality of praxeology. If there are valid arguments against praxeology, trying to invalidate free will is not one of them. Even if free will is ever invalidated, we would still live inside of its illusion.
The states belief that it can determine outcomes, especially as it relates to the economy, is easily just as absurd as believing that it can determine the exact actions and choices of all individuals participating in the market. Because that is what they are claiming the ability to do.
This dangerous belief leads to indeterminable outcomes, that nearly always makes the problem that was supposed to be solved far worse.
