/sci/ - Science & Math

Here's how I promote 999 wizards with certainty.

The dude in the back is screwed. He takes one for the team. He looks at all the hats in front of him, figures out which two he's not seeing (1000 wizards, 1001 hats, one is unused and one is on his head.)

His guess is "I am wearing hat number 1xxxxyyyy, where xxxx is the first hat he can't see and yyyy is the second hat he can't see.

The wizard in front of him then guesses the one hat that isn't one he can see, or xxxx or yyyy. He gets promoted. The next in line guesses the one hat that he can't see, hasn't been guessed yet, and isn't xxxx or yyyy. He gets promoted.

On down the line, and you've got 999 archmages.

Rock is inanimate, unliving mineral. No will present due to no perceivable inside force dictating it's actions.
Flower is partially animate, living material. No will present due to lack of adequate feedback necessary to dictate change on a significant level. Follows the path of least resistance by nature. Alive, of course, but no 'will' of life beyond basic biological functions.
Bird is fully animate, living creature. Will is present in all of its decisions on a primal level - go left instead of right for ideal wind conditions, eat this seed instead of that one due to easier to crack, etc. Decision making that could be quantified as 'free will' present, though still rudimentary and follows the same path as the flower - path of least resistance preferred.
And just because I know where this is going, Human is fully animate, living creature. Will present, inclusive in decision making abilities that can be counter-intuitive despite the path of least resistance being the easiest/best choice. "Free Will" in similar structure to that of the bird, though on a scale we only believe is significant because we can analyze a situation to the point where we can deliberately make wrong decisions instead of taking the path of least resistance. Over-inflated sense of ego and species-wide self-importance leads to 'free will' as is the definition. Are we better than the bird? No, but we believe we are because we can make wrong decisions. In the end, it all boils down to the same decision making process as the bird, simply with more degrees of convolution and unnecessary complexity.