JC175 said:
hannahdonno said:
It had been proven to some extent that we do not have control over our actions. Take for instance, pulling your hand away from a hot kettle. You do not think this action through, or even realise what you are doing, you brain has made the decision for you.
That's true, however as far as I understand that's considered a reflex. I don't really know if the existence of reflex actions contradict the notion of free will, but it's something to consider.
I think it's more to do with not fully understanding your subconcscious mind, surely the default mental state is to prevent harm coming to yourself? I think this is where free will comes in - it governs the conscious mind which is able to think rationally and conceptualise as opposed to the more base-instinct subconscious. Well, I think so anyways
I think one major question to ask is whether the mind is a purely mental or material thing. If the mind could be equated to, say, a combination of chemical reactions in the brain, then I think it would be quite believable to assume that there would be some basic laws governing how our minds function, possibly limiting free will in some way.
However, if our minds were of a different substance to our brains (i.e. substance dualism) then it would be far easier to support the argument for free will.
Just as a point for debate
