will

View more Business & Finance videos

For more information on will, visit Britannica.com.

Formal document distributing the assets of an estate after the death of the person signing it-the Testator. A will is usually written, signed by the testator in the presence of two or more witnesses. Most states also allow handwritten or holographic wills if signed in the presence of the testator by two or more witnesses. Preparing a will has several advantages over leaving an estate Intestate: the testator can designate how the estate will be distributed and can establish a Testamentary Trust for the benefit of children. A will also allows property or real estate owned by the testator to be sold more easily. See alsoInter Vivos Trust; Trust.

noun

1. The mental faculty by which one deliberately chooses or decides: volition. See willing/unwilling.
2. Unwavering firmness of character, action, or will: decidedness, decision, decisiveness, determination, firmness, purpose, purposefulness, resoluteness, resolution, resolve, toughness, willpower. See certain/uncertain, strong/weak.
3. A desire for a particular thing or activity: fancy, liking, mind, pleasure. See like/dislike.
4. Unrestricted freedom to choose: discretion, pleasure. See free/unfree.

verb

1. To have the desire or inclination to: choose, desire, like¹, please, want, wish. Idioms: have a mind, see fit. See desire.
2. To give (property) to another person after one's death: leave¹. Law bequeath, devise. See give/take/reciprocity, law.

Idioms beginning with will:
willing
willies

In addition to the idiom beginning with will, also see against one's will; at will; boys will be boys; heads (will) roll; murder will out; of one's own accord (free will); shit will hit the fan; that will do; time will tell; truth will out; when the cat's away, mice will play; where there's a will; with a will; with the best will in the world; wonders will never cease.

Definition: choose
Antonyms: neglect, pass

v

Definition: give, bequeath to another
Antonyms: keep, receive

The word will is used in connection with acts and actions required of the owner or of the architect/engineer; it is used by the owner or purchaser as a self-imposed requirement; denotes the information the owner will supply, documents the owner will review, and approvals the owner will issue––all at the proper time.

To have a will is to be able to desire an outcome and to purpose to bring it about. Strength of will, or firmness of purpose, is supposed to be good, and weakness of will or akrasia bad. See also free will, good will, volition.

A document in which a person specifies the method to be applied in the management and distribution of his estate after his death.

A will is the legal instrument that permits a person, the testator, to make decisions on how his estate will be managed and distributed after his death. At common law, an instrument disposing of personal property was called a "testament," whereas a will disposed of real property. Over time the distinction has disappeared so that a will, sometimes called a "last will and testament," disposes of both real and personal property. If a person does not leave a will, or the will is declared invalid, the person will have died intestate, resulting in the distribution of the estate according to the laws of descent and distribution of the state in which the person resided. Because of the importance of a will, the law requires it to have certain elements to be valid. Apart from these elements, a will may be ruled invalid if the testator made the will as the result of undue influence, fraud, or mistake.

A will serves a variety of important purposes. It enables a person to select her heirs rather than allowing the state laws of descent and distribution to choose the heirs, who, although blood relatives, might be people the testator dislikes or with whom she is unacquainted. A will allows a person to decide which individual could best serve as the executor of her estate, distributing the property fairly to the beneficiaries while protecting their interests, rather than allowing a court to appoint a stranger to serve as administrator. A will safeguards a person's right to select an individual to serve as guardian to raise her young children in the event of her death.

The failure to execute a will might ultimately reduce the financial worth of the estate because additional legal fees and time delays usually ensue when a court must appoint an administrator or guardian or deal with a matter that could have been settled easily by a will.

The right to dispose of property by a will is controlled completely by statute. Since the 1970s, many states have adopted all or parts of the Uniform Probate Code, which attempts to simplify the laws concerning wills and estates. When a person dies, the law of her domicile (permanent residence) will control the method of distribution of her personal property, such as money, stock, or automobiles. The real property, such as farm or vacant land, will pass to the intended heirs according to the law of the state in which the property is located. Though a testator may exercise much control over the distribution of property, state laws protect spouses and children by providing ways of guaranteeing that a spouse will receive a minimum amount of property, regardless of the provisions of the will.

Requirements of a Will

A valid will cannot exist unless three essential elements are present. First, there must be a competent testator. Second, the document purporting to be a will must meet the execution requirements of statutes, often called the Statute of Wills, designed to ensure that the document is not a fraud but is the honest expression of the testator's intention. Third, it must be clear that the testator intended the document to have the legal effect of a will.

If a will does not satisfy these requirements, any person who would have a financial interest in the estate under the laws of descent and distribution can start an action in the probate court to challenge the validity of the will. The persons who inherit under the will are proponents of the will and defend it against such an attack. This proceeding is known as a will contest. If the people who oppose the admission of the will to probate are successful, the testator's estate will be distributed according to the laws of descent and distribution or the provisions of an earlier will, depending on the facts of the case.

Competent Testator

A competent testator is a person who is of sound mind and requisite age at the time that he makes the will, not at the date of his death when it takes effect. Anyone over a minimum age, usually eighteen, is legally capable of making a will as long as he is competent. A person under the minimum age dies intestate (regardless of efforts to make a will), and his property will be distributed according to the laws of descent and distribution.

An individual has testamentary capacity (sound mind) if he is able to understand the nature and extent of his property, the natural objects of his bounty (to whom he would like to leave the estate), and the nature of the testamentary act (the distribution of his property when he dies). He must also understand how these elements are related so that he can express the method of disposition of property.

A testator is considered mentally incompetent (incapable of making a will) if she has a recognized type of mental deficiency, such as mental retardation or severe mental illness. Mere eccentricities, such as the refusal to bathe, are not considered insane delusions, nor are mistaken beliefs or prejudices about family members. A person who uses drugs or alcohol can validly execute a will as long as she is not under the influence of drugs or intoxicated at the time she makes the will. Illiteracy, old age, or severe physical illness do not automatically deprive a person of a testamentary capacity, but they are factors to be considered along with the particular facts of the case.

Execution of Wills

Every state has statutes prescribing the formalities to be observed in making a valid will. The requirements relate to the writing, signing, witnessing, or attestation of the will in addition to its publication. These legislative safeguards prevent tentative, doubtful, or coerced expressions of desire from controlling the manner in which a person's estate is distributed.

Writing

Wills usually must be in writing but can be in any language and inscribed with any material or device on any substance that results in a permanent record. Generally, most wills are printed on paper to satisfy this requirement. Many states do not recognize as valid a will that is handwritten and signed by the testator. In states that do accept such a will, called a holographic will, it usually must observe the formalities of execution unless exempted by statute. Some jurisdictions also require that such wills be dated by the testator's hand.

Signature

A will must be signed by the testator. Any mark, such as an X, a zero, a check mark, or a name intended by a competent testator to be her signature to authenticate the will, is a valid signing. Some states permit another person to sign a will for a testator at the testator's direction or request or with her consent.

Many state statutes require that the testator's signature be at the end of the will. If it is not, the entire will may be invalidated in those states, and the testator's property will pass according to the laws of descent and distribution. The testator should sign the will before the witnesses sign, but the reverse order is usually permissible if all sign as part of a single transaction.

Witnesses

Statutes require a certain number of witnesses to a will. Most require two, although others mandate three. The witnesses sign the will and must be able to attest (certify) that the testator was competent at the time she made the will.

Though there are no formal qualifications for a witness, it is important that a witness not have a financial interest in the will. If a witness has an interest, his testimony about the circumstances will be suspect because he will profit by its admission to probate. In most states such witnesses must either " purge" their interest under the will ( forfeit their rights under the will) or be barred from testifying, thereby defeating the testator's testamentary plan. If, however, the witness also would inherit under the laws of descent and distribution should the will be invalidated, he will forfeit only the interest in excess of the amount he would receive if the will were voided.

Acknowledgment

A testator is usually required to publish the will — that is, to declare to the witnesses that the instrument is his will. This declaration is called an acknowledgment. No state requires, however, that the witnesses know the contents of the will.

Although some states require a testator to sign the will in the presence of witnesses, the majority require only an acknowledgment of the signature. If a testator shows the signature on a will that he has already signed to a witness and acknowledges that it is his signature, the will is thereby acknowledged.

Attestation

An attestation clause is a certificate signed by the witnesses to a will reciting performance of the formalities of execution that the witnesses observed. It usually is not required for a will to be valid, but in some states it is evidence that the statements made in the attestation are true.

Testator's Intent

For a will to be admitted to probate, it must be clear that the testator acted freely in expressing her testamentary intention. A will executed as a result of undue influence, fraud, or mistake can be declared completely or partially void in a probate proceeding.

Undue Influence

Undue influence is pressure that takes away a person's free will to make decisions, substituting the will of the influencer. A court will find undue influence if the testator was capable of being influenced, improper influence was exerted on the testator, and the testamentary provisions reflect the effect of such influence. Mere advice, persuasion, affection, or kindness does not alone constitute undue influence.

Questions of undue influence typically arise when a will deals unjustly with persons believed to be the natural objects of the testator's bounty. However, undue influence is not established by inequality of the provisions of the will, because this would interfere with the testator's ability to dispose of the property as she pleases. Examples of undue influence include threats of violence or criminal prosecution of the testator, or the threat to abandon a sick testator.

Fraud

Fraud differs from undue influence in that the former involves misrepresentation of essential facts to another to persuade her to make and sign a will that will benefit the person who misrepresents the facts. The testator still acts freely in making and signing the will.

The two types of fraud are fraud in the execution and fraud in the inducement. When a person is deceived by another as to the character or contents of the document she is signing, she is the victim of fraud in the execution. Fraud in the execution includes a situation where the contents of the will are knowingly misrepresented to the testator by someone who will benefit from the misrepresentation.

Fraud in the inducement occurs when a person knowingly makes a will but its terms are based on material misrepresentations of facts made to the testator by someone who will benefit from the testator's beliefs in such lies.

Persons deprived of benefiting under a will because of fraud or undue influence can obtain relief only by contesting the will. If a court finds fraud or undue influence, it may prevent the wrongdoer from receiving any benefit from the will and may distribute the property to those who contested the will.

Mistake

When a testator intended to execute his will but by mistake signed the wrong document, that document will not be enforced. Such mistakes often occur when a husband and wife draft mutual wills. The document that bears the testator's signature does not represent his testamentary intent, and therefore his property cannot be distributed according to its terms.

Special Types of Wills

Some states have statutes that recognize certain kinds of wills that are executed with less formality than ordinary wills when the wills are made under circumstances that reduce the possibility of fraud.

Holographic Wills

A holographic will is completely written and signed in the handwriting of the testator, such as a letter that specifically discusses his intended distribution of the estate after his death. Many states do not recognize the validity of holographic wills, and those that do require that the formalities of execution be followed.

Nuncupative Wills

A nuncupative will is an oral will. Most states do not recognize the validity of such wills because of the greater likelihood of fraud, but those that do impose certain requirements. The will must be made during the testator's last sickness or in expectation of imminent death. The testator must indicate to the witnesses that he wants them to witness his oral will. Such a will can dispose of only personal, not real, property.

Soldiers' and Sailors' Wills

Several states have laws that relax the execution requirements for wills made by soldiers and sailors while on active military duty or at sea. In these situations a testator's oral or handwritten will is capable of passing personal property. Where such wills are recognized, statutes often stipulate that they are valid for only a certain period of time after the testator has left the service. In other instances, however, the will remains valid.

Revocation of a Will

A will is ambulatory, which means that a competent testator may change or revoke it at any time before his death. Revocation of a will occurs when a person who has made a will takes some action to indicate that he no longer wants its provisions to be binding and the law abides by his decision.

For revocation to be effective, the intent of the testator, whether express or implied, must be clear, and an act of revocation consistent with this intent must occur. Persons who wish to revoke a will may use a codicil, which is a document that changes, revokes, or amends part or all of a validly executed will. When a person executes a codicil that revokes some provisions of a previous will, the courts will recognize this as a valid revocation. Likewise, a new will that completely revokes an earlier will indicates the testator's intent to revoke the will.

Statements made by a person at or near the time that he intentionally destroys his will by burning, mutilating, or tearing it clearly demonstrate his intent to revoke.

Sometimes revocation occurs by operation of law, as in the case of a marriage, divorce, birth of a child, or the sale of property devised in the will, which automatically changes the legal duties of the testator. Many states provide that when a testator and spouse have been divorced but the testator's will has not been revised since the change in marital status, any disposition to the former spouse is revoked.

Protection of the Family

The desire of society to protect the spouse and children of a decedent is a major reason both for allowing testamentary disposition of property and for placing limitations upon the freedom of testators.

Surviving Spouse

Three statutory approaches have developed to protect the surviving spouse against disinheritance: dower or curtesy, the elective share, and community property.

Dower or curtesy

At common law, a wife was entitled to dower, a life interest in one-third of the land owned by her husband during the marriage. Curtesy was the right of a husband to a life interest in all of his wife's lands. Most states have abolished common-law dower and curtesy and have enacted laws that treat husband and wife identically. Some statutes subject dower and curtesy to payment of debts, and others extend rights to personal property as well as land. Some states allow dower or curtesy in addition to testamentary provisions, though in other states dower and curtesy are in lieu of testamentary provisions.

Elective share

Although a testator can dispose of her property as she wishes, the law recognizes that the surviving spouse, who has usually contributed to the accumulation of property during the marriage, is entitled to a share in the property. Otherwise, that spouse might ultimately become dependent on the state. For this reason, the elective share was created by statute in states that do not have community property.

Most states have statutes allowing a surviving spouse to elect either a statutory share (usually one-third of the estate if children survive, one-half otherwise), which is the share that the spouse would have received if the decedent had died intestate, or the provision made in the spouse's will. As a general rule, surviving spouses are prohibited from taking their elective share if they unjustly engaged in desertion or committed bigamy.

A spouse can usually waive, release, or contract away her statutory rights to an elective share or to dower or curtesy by either an antenuptial (also called prenuptial) or postnuptial agreement, if it is fair and made with knowledge of all relevant facts. Such agreements must be in writing.

Community property

A community property system generally treats the husband and wife as co-owners of property acquired by either of them during the marriage. On the death of one, the survivor is entitled to one-half the property, and the remainder passes according to the will of the decedent.

Children

Generally parents can completely disinherit their children. A court will uphold such provisions if the testator specifically mentions in the will that he is intentionally disinheriting certain named children. Many states, however, have pretermitted heir provisions, which give children born or adopted after the execution of the will and not mentioned in it an intestate share, unless the omission appears to be intentional.

Other Limitations on Will Provisions

The law has made other exceptions to the general rule that a testator has the unqualified right to dispose of his estate in any way that he sees fit.

Charitable Gifts

Many state statutes protect a testator's family from disinheritance by limiting the testator's power to make charitable gifts. Such limitations are usually operative only where close relatives, such as children, grandchildren, parents, and spouse, survive.

Charitable gifts are limited in certain ways. For example, the amount of the gift can be limited to a certain proportion of the estate, usually 50 percent. Some states prohibit deathbed gifts to charity by invalidating gifts that a testator makes within a specified period before death.

Ademption and Abatement

Ademption is where a person makes a declaration in his will to leave some property to another and then reneges on the declaration, either by changing the property or removing it from the estate. Abatement is the process of determining the order in which property in the estate will be applied to the payment of debts, taxes, and expenses.

The gifts that a person is to receive under a will are usually classified according to their nature for purposes of ademption and abatement. A specific bequest is a gift of a particular identifiable item of personal property, such as an antique violin, whereas a specific devise is an identifiable gift of real property, such as a specifically designated farm.

A demonstrative bequest is a gift of a certain amount of property — $2,000, for example — out of a certain fund or identifiable source of property, such as a savings account at a particular bank.

A general bequest is a gift of property payable from the general assets of the testator's estate, such as a gift of $5,000.

A residuary gift is a gift of the remaining portion of the estate after the satisfaction of other dispositions.

When specific devises and bequests are no longer in the estate or have been substantially changed in character at the time of the testator's death, this is called ademption by extinction, and it occurs irrespective of the testator's intent. If a testator specifically provides in his will that the beneficiary will receive his gold watch, but the watch is stolen prior to his death, the gift adeems and the beneficiary is not entitled to anything, including any insurance payments made to the estate as reimbursement for the loss of the watch.

Ademption by satisfaction occurs when the testator, during her lifetime, gives to her intended beneficiary all or part of a gift that she had intended to give the beneficiary in her will. The intention of the testator is an essential element. Ademption by satisfaction applies to general as well as specific legacies. If the subject matter of a gift made during the lifetime of a testator is the same as that specified in a testamentary provision, it is presumed that the gift is in lieu of the testamentary gift where there is a parent-child or grandparent-parent relationship.

In the abatement process, the intention of the testator, if expressed in the will, governs the order in which property will abate to pay taxes, debts, and expenses. Where the will is silent, the following order is usually applied: residuary gifts, general bequests, demonstrative bequests, and specific bequests and devises.

See: Decedent; Demonstrative Legacy; Estate and Gift Taxes; Executors and Administrators; General Legacy; Holograph; Husband and Wife; Illegitimacy; Intestate Succession; Legacy; Living Will; Parent and Child; Postmarital Agreement; Premarital Agreement; Residuary Clause; Specific Legacy; Trust.

Will, a basic category in philosophy, emerged in the nineteenth century as a concern of psychical research, as attempts were made to prove that human will was a dynamic energy. The earliest experimental apparatus was constructed by M. E. Sa-vary d'Odiardy. An investigation of the instrument by the Society for Psychical Research, London (Proceedings, vol. 8, p. 249) dismissed his claims.

Another instrument was designed by Sydney Alrutz, of the University of Uppsala, Sweden. He called it a volometer or "will board." It comprised a small board resting on knife-edged pegs. The longer and heavier end was supported by means of a string attached to a letter scale and held the board in horizontal position. In this position the scale registered a pressure of five ounces. If the short end was depressed, the long end rose and the letter scale showed a decrease of weight.

The task put before the subjects of Alrutz's experiment was to fix their attention on the long end and will its depression. In a number of cases, 40-100 grams of pressure was thus obtained. Among those who attempted the experiment were many members of the Sixth Psychological Congress at Geneva in August, 1909.

Theodore Flournoy wrote after his own test: "I was able to prove conclusively, after three trials, and under conditions precluding all possibility of fraud or illusion, that the will of these ladies, concentrated upon a certain material object, with a desire to produce a movement in it, ended by producing this movement as if by means of a fluid or an invisible force obeying their mental command."

While these results were impressive, the experiment was flawed by severe methodological vagueness. The experiment demonstrated an unusual effect, but said nothing about the agency involved in causing the change. It could just as easily been an experiment to demonstrate "mesmeric fluid" or ectoplasmic emanations. The intrusion of concepts of "will" have been discarded by parapsychologists in the twentieth century.

A legally enforceable declaration of how a person wishes his or her property to be distributed after death. In a will, a person can also recommend a guardian for his or her children.

Also known as a "will and testament".

Investopedia Says:
Making a will is a very important component of estate planning. In it you declare who gets your belongings and assets when you die. If you do not have a will, the distribution of your property is left up to the government, and may even end up becoming state property. A will helps ensure that your wishes are carried out, and it can make things simpler and easier for your heirs.

Related Links:
Putting this document together will save your family time and money, and give you peace of mind. What Is A Will And Why Do I Need One?
Drafting a will and locking it away for good could negatively affect your beneficiaries. Reasons To Review Or Revise Your Will
Find out why you shouldn't put off putting your affairs in order. 6 Ways To Lose Your Estate
Deciding what will happen to your assets when you pass away is a must - no matter how wealthy you are. Estate Planning Basics
With some preparation, you can save your heirs from paying a hefty estate tax. Here are some tips. Getting Started On Your Estate Plan
Life changes make it time to rewrite your plan's designations. An Estate Planning Must: Update Your Beneficiaries
A store-bought will might not cut it - learn what you need to have in yours. Six Estate Planning Must-Haves
Don't let bad estate planning lead to unnecessary costs and stress for your inheritors. Skipping-Out on Probate Costs
What would happen if you were suddenly unable to manage your financial affairs? Preparation is the best protection. Your Will: Why You Need A Power Of Attorney And Beneficiaries
If you're a beneficiary of a retirement account, you should know your distribution options. Inherited Retirement Plan Assets - Part 1

Contents 1 Classical philosophy 2 Medieval European philosophy 3 Early modern philosophy 4 Rousseau 5 Kant 6 Schopenhauer 7 Nietzsche 8 Idealism: Will as all 9 In related disciplines 10 See also 11 Further reading 12 References 13 Bibliography 14 External links

Will, in Western philosophical discussions, consonant with a common English usage, refers to a property of the mind, and an attribute of acts intentionally performed. Actions made according to a person's will are called “willing” or “voluntary” and sometimes pejoratively “willful” or “at will”. In general, "Will" does not refer to one particular or most preferred desire but rather to the general capacity to have such desiderata and act decisively to achieve them, according to whatever criteria the willing agent applies. The will is in turn important within philosophy because a person's will is one of the most distinct parts of their mind, along with reason and understanding. It is one of the things which makes a person who they are, and it is especially important in ethics, because it is the part which determines whether people act, at least when they act deliberately.

One of the repeating questions discussed in the Western philosophical tradition since Christianization is the question of "free will", and the related but more general notion of fate, which asks how will can be truly free if the actions of people have natural or divine causes which determine them, but which are not really under the control of people. The question is directly connected to discussions of what Freedom is, and also the "problem of evil", because it brings into question whether people really cause their own acts.

Classical philosophy

The classical treatment of the ethical importance of will is to be found in the Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle, in Books III (chapters 1-5), and Book VII (chapters 1-10). These discussions have been a major influence in the development of ethical and legal thinking in western civilization.

In Book III Aristotle divided actions into three categories instead of two:

• Voluntary (ekousion) acts.
• Involuntary or unwilling (akousion) acts, which are in the simplest case where people do not praise or blame. In such cases a person does not choose the wrong thing, for example if the wind carries a person off, or if a person has a wrong understanding of the particular facts of a situation. Note that ignorance of what aims are good and bad, such as people of bad character always have, is not something people typically excuse as ignorance in this sense. "Acting on account of ignorance seems different from acting while being ignorant".
• "Non-voluntary" or "non willing" actions (ouk ekousion) which are bad actions done by choice, or more generally (as in the case of animals and children when desire or spirit causes an action) whenever "the source of the moving of the parts that are instrumental in such actions is in oneself" and anything "up to oneself either to do or not". However, these actions are not taken because they are preferred in their own right, but rather because all options available are worse.

It is concerning this third class of actions that there is doubt about whether they should be praised or blamed or condoned in different cases.

Virtue and vice according to Aristotle are "up to us". This means that although no one is willingly unhappy, vice by definition always involves actions which were decided upon willingly. Vice comes from bad habits and aiming at the wrong things, not deliberately aiming to be unhappy. The vices then, are voluntary just as the virtues are. He states that people would have to be unconscious not to realize the importance of allowing themselves to live badly, and he dismisses any idea that different people have different innate visions of what is good.

In Book VII, Aristotle discusses self-mastery, or the difference between what people decide to do, and what they actually do. For Aristotle, akrasia, "unrestraint", is distinct from animal-like behavior because it is specific to humans and involves conscious rational thinking about what to do, even though the conclusions of this thinking are not put into practice. When someone behaves in a purely animal-like way, then for better or worse they are not acting based upon any conscious choice.

Aristotle also addresses a few questions raised earlier, on the basis of what he has explained:-

• Not everyone who stands firm on the basis of a rational and even correct decision has self-mastery. Stubborn people are actually more like a person without self-mastery, because they are partly led by the pleasure coming from victory.
• Not everyone who fails to stand firm on the basis of his best deliberations has a true lack of self mastery. As an example he gives the case of Neoptolemus (in Sophocles' Philoctetes) refusing to lie despite being part of a plan he agreed with.
• A person with practical wisdom (phronesis) can not have akrasia. Instead it might sometimes seem so, because mere cleverness can sometimes recite words which might make them sound wise, like an actor or a drunk person reciting poetry. A person lacking self-mastery can have knowledge, but not an active knowledge that they are paying attention to. For example when someone is in a state such as being drunk or enraged, people may have knowledge, and even show that they have that knowledge, like an actor, but not be using it.

Medieval European philosophy

This unreferenced section requires citations to ensure verifiability.

In the Middle Ages, at least in Europe, Aristotelian examples became part of a standard approach to all legal and ethical discussion. The overall movement is known as "Scholasticism" and followers of this standard approach are often referred to as "School men". Much of their discussion on such matters consisted in debates about how to correctly interpret Aristotle, in a way consistent with Christian doctrine and the Bible.

Early modern philosophy

The use of English in philosophical publications began in the early modern period, and therefore the English word "will" became a term used in philosophical discussion. During this same period, Scholasticism, which had largely been a Latin language movement, was heavily criticized. Both Francis Bacon and René Descartes described the human intellect or understanding as something which needed to be considered limited, and needing the help of a methodical and skeptical approach to learning about nature. Bacon emphasized the importance analyzing experience in an organized way, for example experimentation, while Descartes, seeing the success of Galileo in using mathematics in physics, emphasized the role of methodical reasoning as in mathematics and geometry. Descartes specifically said that error comes about because the will is not limited to judging things which the understanding is limited to, and described the possibility of such judging or choosing things ignorantly, without understanding them, as free will.^[1]

Under the influence of Bacon and Descartes, Thomas Hobbes made one of the first attempts to systematically analyze ethical and political matters in a modern way. He defined will in his Leviathan Chapter VI, in words which explicitly criticize the medieval scholastic definitions:

In deliberation, the last appetite, or aversion, immediately adhering to the action, or to the omission thereof, is that we call the will; the act, not the faculty, of willing. And beasts that have deliberation, must necessarily also have will. The definition of the will, given commonly by the Schools, that it is a rational appetite, is not good. For if it were, then could there be no voluntary act against reason. For a voluntary act is that, which proceedeth from the will, and no other. But if instead of a rational appetite, we shall say an appetite resulting from a precedent deliberation, then the definition is the same that I have given here. Will therefore is the last appetite in deliberating. And though we say in common discourse, a man had a will once to do a thing, that nevertheless he forbore to do; yet that is properly but an inclination, which makes no action voluntary; because the action depends not of it, but of the last inclination, or appetite. For if the intervenient appetites, make any action voluntary; then by the same reason all intervenient aversions, should make the same action involuntary; and so one and the same action, should be both voluntary and involuntary.

By this it is manifest, that not only actions that have their beginning from covetousness, ambition, lust, or other appetites to the thing propounded; but also those that have their beginning from aversion, or fear of those consequences that follow the omission, are voluntary actions.

Concerning "free will", most early modern philosophers, including Hobbes, Spinoza, Locke and Hume believed that the term was frequently used in a wrong or illogical sense, and that the philosophical problems concerning any difference between "will" and "free will" are due to verbal confusion (because all will is free):

a FREEMAN, is he, that in those things, which by his strength and wit he is able to do, is not hindered to do what he has a will to. But when the words free, and liberty, are applied to any thing but bodies, they are abused; for that which is not subject to motion, is not subject to impediment: and therefore, when it is said, for example, the way is free, no liberty of the way is signified, but of those that walk in it without stop. And when we say a gift is free, there is not meant any liberty of the gift, but of the giver, that was not bound by any law or covenant to give it. So when we speak freely, it is not the liberty of voice, or pronunciation, but of the man, whom no law hath obliged to speak otherwise than he did. Lastly, from the use of the word free-will, no liberty can be inferred of the will, desire, or inclination, but the liberty of the man; which consisteth in this, that he finds no stop, in doing what he has the will, desire, or inclination to do.."^[2]

Spinoza argues that seemingly "free" actions aren't actually free, or that the entire concept is a chimera because "internal" beliefs are necessarily caused by earlier external events. The appearance of the internal is a mistake rooted in ignorance of causes, not in an actual volition, and therefore the will is always determined. Spinoza also rejects teleology, and suggests that the causal nature along with an originary orientation of the universe is everything we encounter.

Some generations later, David Hume made a very similar point to Hobbes in other words:

But to proceed in this reconciling project with regard to the question of liberty and necessity; the most contentious question of metaphysics, the most contentious science; it will not require many words to prove, that all mankind have ever agreed in the doctrine of liberty as well as in that of necessity, and that the whole dispute, in this respect also, has been hitherto merely verbal. For what is meant by liberty, when applied to voluntary actions? We cannot surely mean that actions have so little connexion with motives, inclinations, and circumstances, that one does not follow with a certain degree of uniformity from the other, and that one affords no inference by which we can conclude the existence of the other. For these are plain and acknowledged matters of fact. By liberty, then, we can only mean a power of acting or not acting, according to the determinations of the will; that is, if we choose to remain at rest, we may; if we choose to move, we also may. Now this hypothetical liberty is universally allowed to belong to every one who is not a prisoner and in chains. Here, then, is no subject of dispute.^[3]

Rousseau

Main article: General Will

Jean-Jacques Rousseau added a new type of will to those discussed by philosophers, which he called the "General will" (volonté générale). This concept developed from Rousseau's considerations on the social contract theory of Hobbes, and describes the shared will of a whole citizenry, whose agreement is understood to exist in discussions about the legitimacy of governments and laws.

Kant

Kant's Transcendental Idealism claimed that "all objects are mere appearances [phenomena]."^[4] He asserted that "nothing whatsoever can ever be said about the thing in itself that may be the basis of these appearances."^[5] Kant's critics responded by saying that Kant had no right, therefore, to assume the existence of a thing in itself.

Schopenhauer

Schopenhauer disagreed with Kant's critics and stated that it is absurd to assume that phenomena have no basis. Schopenhauer proposed that we cannot know the thing in itself as though it is a cause of phenomena. Instead, he said that we can know it by knowing our own body, which is the only thing that we can know at the same time as both a phenomenon and a thing in itself.

When we become conscious of ourself, we realize that our essential qualities are endless urging, craving, striving, wanting, and desiring. These are characteristics of that which we call our will. Schopenhauer affirmed that we can legitimately think that all other phenomena are also essentially and basically will. According to him, will "is the innermost essence, the kernel, of every particular thing and also of the whole. It appears in every blindly acting force of nature, and also in the deliberate conduct of man…."^[6] Schopenhauer said that his predecessors mistakenly thought that the will depends on knowledge. According to him, though, the will is primary and uses knowledge in order to find an object that will satisfy its craving. That which, in us, we call will is Kant's "thing in itself", according to Schopenhauer.

Arthur Schopenhauer put the puzzle of free will and moral responsibility in these terms:

Everyone believes himself a priori to be perfectly free, even in his individual actions, and thinks that at every moment he can commence another manner of life. ... But a posteriori, through experience, he finds to his astonishment that he is not free, but subjected to necessity, that in spite of all his resolutions and reflections he does not change his conduct, and that from the beginning of his life to the end of it, he must carry out the very character which he himself condemns...^[7]

In his On the Freedom of the Will, Schopenhauer stated, "You can do what you will, but in any given moment of your life you can will only one definite thing and absolutely nothing other than that one thing."^[8]

Nietzsche

Further information: Friedrich Nietzsche, The Will to Power, Intrinsic motivation

Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche was influenced by Schopenhauer when younger, but later felt him to be wrong. However, he maintained a modified focus upon will, making the term "will to power" famous as an explanation of human aims and actions.

Idealism: Will as all

Further information: Idealism, New Thought, Magick, Thelema, Karma

In idealist models of reality, the material world is either non-existent or is a secondary artifact of the "true" world of ideas. In such worlds, it can be said that everything is an act of will. Even if you are arrested by the police, this is actually an act of your will, too; if you didn't want it to happen, you could have decided otherwise. This line of thought is seen among proponents of a spiritual or mystical universe such as the Carlos Castaneda, New Thought writers Frank Channing Haddock (The Power of Will) and William Walker Atkinson (Personal Power Volume V: Will Power).

The concept of Will is especially important to certain Hermetic and esoteric traditions, particularly in the West and those mystical practices associated with European ideology. Perhaps most notably, the concept takes on an essential role as the philosophical-spiritual basis of Thelema (and its various delineations), an occultic system of thought developed by the writer-mystic Aleister Crowley: Crowley argued that Will provides for a certain ground of being, as well as the possibility that rituals such as ceremonial magic, yoga, and meditation allow for conscious beings to have direct influence over reality and both the spiritual and metaphysical world. Important to Thelema (the term itself meaning "will") is the notion of a difference between mundane "will" and True Will, the latter of which is the purposed fulfillment of human beings through a process of [largely esoteric] methods employed to achieve self-realization.

In related disciplines

Further information: Will (sociology), Volition (psychology), Self control

Psychologists also deal with issues of will and "willpower" the ability to effect will in behavior; some people are highly intrinsically motivated and do whatever seems best to them, while others are "weak-willed" and easily suggestible (extrinsically motivated) by society or outward inducement. Apparent failures of the will and volition have also been reported associated with a number of mental and neurological disorders.^[9][10] They also study the phenomenon of Akrasia, wherein people seemingly act against their best interests and know that they are doing so (for instance, restarting cigarette smoking after having intellectually decided to quit). Advocates of Sigmund Freud's psychology stress the importance of the influence of the unconscious mind upon the apparent conscious exercise of will. Abraham Low, a critic of psychoanalysis,^[11] stressed the importance of will, the ability to control thoughts and impulses, as fundamental for achieving mental health.^[12]

The sociologist Ferdinand Tönnies, in analysing group psychology, distinguishes between will directed at furthering the interests of the group (Wesenwille or "essential will"), and will directed at furthering individual goals (Kürwille or "arbitrary will").

See also

• Aboulia
• Categorical imperative
• God's will
• Neuroscience of free will
• Vīrya
• World as Will and Representation

Further reading

• St. Augustine (1993). On Free Choice of the Will. Hackett Pub. Co. ISBN 0-87220-188-0. 
• Luther, Martin (1990) (in German). The Bondage of the Will. Revell. ISBN 0-8007-5342-9. 
• Nietzsche, Friedrich (1968) [1901] (in German). The Will to Power. Vintage. ISBN 0-394-70437-1. 
• Norwood, Rick. The Evolution of the Will. Philosophy in Science, Vol 6. 

References

1. ^ Meditation IV: Concerning the True and the False
2. ^ Hobbes, T. (1651) Leviathan CHAPTER XXI.: "Of the liberty of subjects" (1968 edition). London: Penguin Books.
3. ^ Hume, D. (1740). A Treatise of Human Nature SECTION VIII.: "Of liberty and necessity" (1967 edition). Oxford University Press, Oxford. ISBN 0-87220-230-5
4. ^ Critique of Pure Reason, A 49. At end of "General Observations on Transcendental Aesthetic," p. 39 of Müller's translation. Also B 63: "…as the external sense gives us nothing but representations of relations, that sense can contain in its representations only the relation of an object to the subject, and not what is inside the object by itself. The same applies to internal intuition."
5. ^ Critique of Pure Reason, A 49.
6. ^ The World as Will and Representation, vol. I, § 21
7. ^ Schopenhauer, Arthur, The Wisdom of Life, p 147
8. ^ Schopenhauer, Arthur, On the Freedom of the Will, Oxford: Basil Blackwell ISBN 0-631-14552-4
9. ^ Berrios, G.E.; Gili, M. (1995). "Will and its disorders. A conceptual history". History of Psychiatry 6: 87–104. 
10. ^ Berrios, G.E.; Gili, M. (1995). "Abulia and impulsiveness revisited". Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 92: 161–167. 
11. ^ Sagarin, Edward (1969). "Chapter 9. Mental patients: are they their brothers' therapists?". Odd Man In: Societies of Deviants in America. Chicago, Illinois: Quadrangle Books. pp. 210–232. ISBN 0-531-06344-5. OCLC 34435. 
12. ^ Wechsler, Henry (April 1960). "The self-help organization in the mental health field: Recovery, Inc., a case study". The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 130: 297–314. doi:10.1097/00005053-196004000-00004. ISSN 0022-3018. OCLC 13848734. PMID 13843358. 

•  This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. 

Bibliography

• Critique of Pure Reason
• The World as Will and Representation, vol. 1, Dover edition, 1966, ISBN 0-486-21761-2

External links

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Will (philosophy)

• Autistics may not experience will as we understand it
• Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Free Will entry
• The Will Project was a project proposed by Roberto Assagioli to explore all aspects and manifestations of the Will.
• Willpower: It’s in Your Head NYT Article summarizing some recent psychological positions and results.

v t e Philosophy Branches Metaphysics Epistemology Logic Ethics Aesthetics Philosophy of Action Art Being Biology Business Chemistry Computer science Culture Design Dialogue Education Economics Engineering Environment Film Futility Geography Information Healthcare History Human nature Humor Language Law Literature Mathematics Mind Music Pain Philosophy Physics Politics Psychology Religion Hermeneutics Science Sexuality Social science Technology War Schools of thought By historical era Ancient Western Medieval Renaissance Modern Contemporary Ancient Chinese Agriculturalism Confucianism Legalism Logicians Mohism Chinese naturalism Neotaoism Taoism Yangism Zen Greco-Roman Aristotelianism Cynicism Epicureanism Neoplatonism Peripatetic Platonism Presocratic Pythagoreanism Sophism Stoicism Indian Buddhist Cārvāka Hindu Jain Persian Mazdakism Zoroastrianism Zurvanism 9th–16th centuries Christian Europe Scholasticism Renaissance humanism Thomism East Asian Korean Confucianism Rigaku Neo-Confucianism Islamic Averroism Avicennism Persian Illuminationism Kalam Sufi Jewish Judeo-Islamic 17th–21st centuries Absolute idealism Analytic philosophy Anarchism Behaviorism Cartesianism Classical liberalism Deconstruction Dialectical materialism Eliminativism Epiphenomenalism Egoism Existentialism Feminist Frankfurt School Functionalism Hegelianism Kantianism Kokugaku Kyoto school Legal positivism Logical positivism Marxism Modernism Neo-Kantianism Neo-Thomism New Confucianism Ordinary language Phenomenology Postmodernism Post-structuralism Pragmatism Reformed epistemology Structuralism Transcendentalism Utilitarianism Vienna Circle more... Positions Certainty Skepticism Solipsism Nihilism Ethics Consequentialism Deontology Virtue Free will Compatibilism Determinism Libertarianism Metaphysics Atomism Dualism Monism Naturalism Epistemology Constructivism Empiricism Idealism Particularism Rationalism Naturalism Normativity Absolutism Particularism Relativism Universalism Ontology Action Event Process Reality Anti-realism Conceptualism Idealism Materialism Nominalism Realism By region African American Aztec British Chinese Danish French German Greek Indian Indonesian Iranian Italian Japanese Korean Polish Romanian Russian Lists Outline Index Schools Glossary Philosophers Movements Publications Portal Category WikiProject changes

This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)

Common misspelling(s) of will

• iwll
• wiull

Dansk (Danish)
1.
aux. v. - ville

2.
n. - vilje
v. tr. - ville, testamentere
v. intr. - ville

idioms:

• a will of one's own    egen vilje, egensindet
• as you will    som du ønsker
• at will    tilfældigt, efter behag, efter ønske, efter forgodtbefindende
• good will    venlighed, fredelig, godhjertet, goodwill
• with a will    med fynd og klem, af hjertens lyst

Nederlands (Dutch)
wil, verlangen, testament, zullen, vermaken

Français (French)
1.
aux. v. - (auxil. verbal) du futur, bien sûr/volontiers (de consentement), vouloir (offre, invitation), pouvoir (ordre, demande), devoir (supposition), pouvoir (capacité)

idioms:

• will do    faire l'affaire

2.
n. - volonté, désir, (Jur) testament
v. tr. - avoir l'intention de, souhaiter ardemment, supplier mentalement, vouloir, (Jur) léguer (à)
v. intr. - exercer la volonté, faire un choix définitif

idioms:

• a will of one's own    (faire) ce qu'on a envie de faire
• as you will    comme vous voudrez
• at will    à volonté, comme vous voulez, quand vous voulez
• good will    bonne volonté
• if you will    si vous voulez
• will power    volonté (de faire)
• with a will    avec une force, avec une volonté

Deutsch (German)
1.
aux. v. - werden

idioms:

• will do    wird gemacht, mach ich (ugs.)

2.
n. - Wille, Belieben, Testament
v. - werden, wollen, pflegen, würd(est/e/et/en) , hinterlassen

idioms:

• a will of one's own    sein eigener Wille
• as you will    wie du willst
• at will    nach Belieben
• good will    gute Absicht, guter Wille
• if you will    wenn Sie wollen, bitte
• will power    Selbstbeherrschung
• with a will    mit großem Eifer

Ελληνική (Greek)
v. - θα, θέλω, (νομ.) διαθέτω, παραχωρώ με διαθήκη
n. - βούληση, θέληση, θέλημα, επιθυμία, (νομ.) διαθήκη

idioms:

• a will of one's own    ελεύθερη θέληση
• as you will    όπως επιθυμείτε
• at will    κατά βούληση
• good will    καλή προαίρεση, (οικον.) φήμη και πελατεία
• with a will    (καθομ.) με ζέση ή προθυμία

Italiano (Italian)
'futuro del verbo', dovere, 'imperativo del verbo', lasciare, volontà, testamento

idioms:

• a will of one's own    avere le proprie idee
• at will    a volontà
• with a will    risolutamente

Português (Portuguese)
v. - desejar, irá (verbo auxiliar usado para formar o futuro)
n. - desejo (m), propósito (m)

idioms:

• a will of one's own    ser bastante voluntarioso
• as you will    como quiser
• at will    exatamente como ou quando alguém deseja
• good will    boa vontade
• with a will    com determinação

Русский (Russian)
воля, сила воли, желание, энтузиазм, интерес, завещание, последняя воля, проявлять волю, хотеть, заставлять внушать, завещать, сбившийся с пути, запутавшийся

idioms:

• a will of one's own    сильная воля, своенравие, упрямство
• as you will    как хотите
• at will    как заблагорассудится, по усмотрению
• good will    добрая воля, доброжелательность, искренность
• with a will    охотно, добровольно, с энтузиазмом

Español (Spanish)
1.
aux. v. - v. aux. en segunda y tercera persona para forma declaración o pregunta en futuro simple o modo condicional, en primera persona para formar una declaración futura o condicional expresando intención o deseo

idioms:

• will do    haremos, promesa

2.
n. - voluntad, albedrío
v. tr. - desear, tener el propósito de
v. intr. - tener o sentir deseo de

idioms:

• a will of one's own    tener voluntad propia
• as you will    como Ud. quiera
• at will    a voluntad, a discreción
• good will    buena voluntad
• if you will    si Ud. quiere, si es lo que Ud. desea
• will power    fuerza de voluntad
• with a will    con ilusión, con entusiasmo, de buena gana

Svenska (Swedish)
v. - skola, vilja, kunna, bruka, befalla, förmå, påverka, testamentera
n. - vilja, beslutsamhet, testamente

中文（简体）(Chinese (Simplified))
决意, 立遗嘱, 愿, 下决心, 愿意, 将, 必须, 意志, 意向, 决心

idioms:

• a will of one's own    固执
• as you will    如你所愿
• at will    随意, 任意
• good will    亲善关系
• with a will    努力

中文（繁體）(Chinese (Traditional))
1.
v. tr. - 渴望;想要;願
v. intr. - 下決心, 願意
n. - 意志;毅力

idioms:

• a will of one's own    固執
• as you will    如你所願
• at will    隨意, 任意
• good will    親善關係
• with a will    努力

2.
aux. v. - 將

한국어 (Korean)
1.
aux. v. - ~할 작정이다, ~할 것이다

2.
n. - 의지, 결의
v. tr. - 바라다, 의지력으로 ~를 시키다, (재산 등을) 유언으로 남기다
v. intr. - 의지를 작용케 하다, 바라다

idioms:

• a will of one's own    스스로의 의지
• as you will    당신 뜻대로
• at will    뜻대로, 마음 내키는 대로
• with a will    진지하게 , 진심으로

日本語 (Japanese)
v. - 意図する, 決意する, 意志の力でさせる, 遺贈する, 意志をはたらかせる
n. - 男子名, 意志, 意志の力, 意図, 遺言, 遺言書

idioms:

• a will of one's own    自己の意志
• as you will    あなたの意志で
• at will    意のままに
• heads will roll    首切りがあるだろう
• it will serve    役に立つ, 目的をかなえる
• that will do    それで十分だ
• will have none of    拒否する
• will not hear of    ～を絶対に認めない
• with a will    身を入れて

العربيه (Arabic)
‏(فعل) يرغب, يشاء, يريد, يوصي (الاسم) الإرادة, رغبه, ميل, شهوة, اختيار, شهيه, تصميم, مشيئه‏

עברית (Hebrew)
aux. v. - ‮פועל עזר לציון עתיד‬
n. - ‮רצון, רצייה, כוח-רצון, כוונה, צוואה‬
v. tr. - ‮רצה, חפץ, הפעיל בכוח הרצון, ציווה, הוריש, הנחיל‬
v. intr. - ‮רצה, חפץ‬

If you are unable to view some languages clearly, click here.