Fichte takes an I or free will to be not a thing or being but an act which is not undetermined but self-determined, in accordance with reasons or norms rationally self-given.

Kant takes a free will to be a being or substance with the power to cause a state of the world (or a whole series of such states) spontaneously or from itself.

We can never prove that we are free or integrate our freedom in any way into our objective conception of the causal order of nature.

I think the contribution people make is not proportionate to their fame or success. In fact, I think the relation is often inverse.

Adam Smith was aware of the way that economic interests could have a distorting and destructive effect both on the market and on politics.

We can't coherently deny, or even decline to affirm, that we are free.

It is a culturally interesting (but also deeply depressing) fact that many religious claims seem to retain their emotional power for believers only if taken in ways that are intellectually unsupportable and even morally contemptible.