The given definition of determinism doesn't allow the possibility of 'both ways' or taking a selected option. A progression of events that cannot deviate does not select from a range of options. With no alternate options to choose or to take, there is no choosing, hence no 'fact of choosing.'
The given definition of determinism is that every event will be the reliable result of prior events, such that everything that happens will have been causally necessary from any prior point in time, such that everything that happens inevitably must happen, without deviation.
We observe the people in the restaurant, choosing, from a menu of possibilities, what they will order for dinner. The people, the restaurant, the menu, the possibilities, the single chosen will ("I will have the Chef Salad, please"), were ALL causally necessary from any prior point in time and inevitably must happen.
They have no realizable alternatives to choose from. The list of options on the menu caters to different people with different tastes. Each ordering according to their own state and condition, each according to their own proclivities, wants, needs, etc.
Choice, by definition, requires possible alternatives. Determinism does not allow alternatives.
There is no honest way to say that these objects and events did not happen or were simply an "illusion".
The events happen as determined, but not because anyone present had multiple realizable options, and could have chosen something that was not determined.
That is the point. No alternatives. each and every action entailed by prior states of the system, no deviation.
Choosing, by definition, requires being presented with two or more realizable options where you free to take any one of them.
Each customer was presented with a menu of realizable options, and, they were free to order the one that they deliberately chose.
They ordered what they must necessarily order in that instance in time and place.
What Does Deterministic System Mean?
''A deterministic system is a system in which a given initial state or condition will always produce the same results. There is no randomness or variation in the ways that inputs get delivered as outputs.''
Determinism entails that ...
Determinism entails exactly what I said it entails: every event will be the reliable result of prior events, such that everything that happens will have been causally necessary from any prior point in time, such that everything that happens inevitably must happen, without deviation.
Choosing is one of those events that happens. Determinism entails that choosing inevitably must happen.
If the event of ordering a meal, or anything else, is entailed, fixed, set, long before the person comes to that point, the person has no choice, that action must proceed as determined, not freely chosen or freely willed.
If it's determined that Bob and his wife Janet go to a cafe at 11:30am and Bob must necessarily order Fish and Chips and Janet must necessarily order salad......how is that a free choice?
It's not a choice at all.
Absolutely. Which of course negates freedom. All actions proceed as they must, not as they are chosen.
''Determinism means that events will proceed naturally (as if "fixed as a matter of natural law") and reliably ("without deviation"). - Marvin Edwards
Given the stipulation of 'no deviation,'' you must necessarily order salad for dinner in that instance in time and place, and that ordering steak must necessarily be impossible.
Given the circumstances (bacon and eggs for breakfast and a double cheeseburger for lunch), I would not order the steak at that point in time, even though I certainly could have ordered it.
If you ''could have,'' it's not determinism
Ordering the steak was never impossible. I've ordered the steak before and I'll likely order the steak again, if I have more fruit and vegetables at breakfast and lunch. If the steak were not on the menu, or if the restaurant ran out of steak, then ordering the steak would be impossible. But none of those conditions were present on the evening when I ordered the salad instead.
It's clearly stipulated to be impossible in the 'no deviation/fixed by antecedents' aspect of determinism. If it is possible to take alternate actions, it's not determinism.
Claiming that it is possible to take an alternate action, 'steak instead of salad' when ordering salad is the determined action, is breaking the terms and conditions of determinism.
The terms and conditions of determinism apply to what we will do, but not to what we can do. You are falsely conflating what we can do with what we will do. And this is a consistent error within the incompatibilist understanding of determinism.
'Will do' in relation to the given definition of determinism is inseparable from 'must necessarily do.'
Whatever is done, must necessarily be done.
What you must do, you inevitably will do. As defined (not because I say so), a fixed progression of deterministic events that unfold without deviation.