Poll: Does free-will exist?

[Tallim]

You can't chose how you think so you can't possibly make free decisions. The veiling of this process or the illusion of free will could well be a defence mechanism of the mind to prevent it going into a neuro-feedback loop and rendering the whole organism essentially unusable.

Your reaction and thoughts to anything is determined by the connection your brain makes between them which in turn is affected by base level instincts. Given the brain has countless things stored the connections between them have infinite permutations. Which is why people appear so different in personality.

Things that appear to be choices that counteract base instincts like surviving could be any number of things from the brain through experience believing that endangering survival is actually a reasonable way to achieve some other goal or damage or conflicts between associations causing the reaction.

 

[Iron Lightning]

But let's think this out a bit:do we do anything out of free will?Take for example all the little things you do in your daily life like eating and sleeping and...going to the bathroom.Do we consider those to be out of free will?If free will does exist,then we should be able to have it in every moment of our life.

That is all.

I've fasted and pulled all nighters. And we've all been in a situation where we've post-poned going to the bathroom...For example, someone goes to the theater and orders a large coke. He finds he showed up way early--the previews haven't even started. Absent-mindedly, he continues to drink it. The movies about to start, and the cup is already empty. He quickly grabs a refill and enjoys his second large coke during the movie. Near the end, he needs to go to the bathroom...but the movie is so good! Despite how uncomfortable it is, he waits through the movie and goes afterwards.

Given the right inspiration, even basic needs can be postponed, despite discomfort or pain.

Aha!But touche!You can post-pone these needs,but eventually they force you to go.If I were to give a straight answer(which in my earlier post I couldn't because of my lack of sleep):No-we don't have free will.Yes-we have the impression that we have free will.

That is all.

Hold on now, what of Irom Shirmilla [http://www.kashmirwatch.com/showexclusives.php?subaction=showfull&id=1291812795&archive=&start_from=&ucat=15&var1news=value1news]: a woman who died from starvation as a result of her hunger strike. Surely she was not beholden to her needs. She had ready access to food and yet she chose to die of hunger. There is no greater expression of free will.

Now now.I'm not trying to dismiss such situations.I actually had in my family people that went on hunger strikes.I just used some examples that people can relate to.Personally,I find people that have the guts to stand up for their ideals to be heroes.
That is all.

Well, good sir, all I mean to say is that humans are provably not beholden to their biological needs which, along with the inherently indeterminate nature of the universe, demonstrates the existence of free will.

Ah good sir.I shall one up you!Your example,Irom Shirmilla:didn't she go on a hunger strike because of desperation?Just the other day,somebody from my country jumped of a balcony that was in our parliament because of desperation.Doesn't this emotion defeat the purpose of free will?

Nay, Irom Shirmilla went on her hunger strike because of a decision that she reached under the influence of desperation. In fact, she was originally accompanied by two other women who eventually stopped their hunger strike. Also, observe all the people threatened by India's "Armed Forces Special Power Act" who were not driven to extremes despite being exposed to similar desperation.

The point of free will is that, unless you're being directly controlled, you always have a choice. For example: I could point a gun at you and demand that you eat a cookie. Most people would simply eat the cookie, but if I perform this action to enough different people I will eventually encounter someone who would make the completely irrational decision to die instead of eating a cookie.

 

[minemin]

But let's think this out a bit:do we do anything out of free will?Take for example all the little things you do in your daily life like eating and sleeping and...going to the bathroom.Do we consider those to be out of free will?If free will does exist,then we should be able to have it in every moment of our life.

That is all.

I've fasted and pulled all nighters. And we've all been in a situation where we've post-poned going to the bathroom...For example, someone goes to the theater and orders a large coke. He finds he showed up way early--the previews haven't even started. Absent-mindedly, he continues to drink it. The movies about to start, and the cup is already empty. He quickly grabs a refill and enjoys his second large coke during the movie. Near the end, he needs to go to the bathroom...but the movie is so good! Despite how uncomfortable it is, he waits through the movie and goes afterwards.

Given the right inspiration, even basic needs can be postponed, despite discomfort or pain.

Aha!But touche!You can post-pone these needs,but eventually they force you to go.If I were to give a straight answer(which in my earlier post I couldn't because of my lack of sleep):No-we don't have free will.Yes-we have the impression that we have free will.

That is all.

Hold on now, what of Irom Shirmilla [http://www.kashmirwatch.com/showexclusives.php?subaction=showfull&id=1291812795&archive=&start_from=&ucat=15&var1news=value1news]: a woman who died from starvation as a result of her hunger strike. Surely she was not beholden to her needs. She had ready access to food and yet she chose to die of hunger. There is no greater expression of free will.

Now now.I'm not trying to dismiss such situations.I actually had in my family people that went on hunger strikes.I just used some examples that people can relate to.Personally,I find people that have the guts to stand up for their ideals to be heroes.
That is all.

Well, good sir, all I mean to say is that humans are provably not beholden to their biological needs which, along with the inherently indeterminate nature of the universe, demonstrates the existence of free will.

Ah good sir.I shall one up you!Your example,Irom Shirmilla:didn't she go on a hunger strike because of desperation?Just the other day,somebody from my country jumped of a balcony that was in our parliament because of desperation.Doesn't this emotion defeat the purpose of free will?

Nay, Irom Shirmilla went on her hunger strike because of a decision that she reached under the influence of desperation. In fact, she was originally accompanied by two other women who eventually stopped their hunger strike. Also, observe all the people threatened by India's "Armed Forces Special Power Act" who were not driven to extremes despite being exposed to similar desperation.

The point of free will is that, unless you're being directly controlled, you always have a choice. For example: I could point a gun at you and demand that you eat a cookie. Most people would simply eat the cookie, but if I perform this action to enough different people I will eventually encounter someone who would make the completely irrational decision to die instead of eating a cookie.

Ok I admit.I lost that battle.But for example:remember the Skinner Box episode from Extra Credit?Don't you think that if we are constantly enticed to continue playing even if the reward isn't clear.we don't really have free will?And now you will go and say "But i chose to
do it!",to which i reply "No you didn't!You were forced by instinct and conditioning!"

That is all.^^

 

[iRiis]

Eurgh, read 5 pages, noting people I was going to quote and rebut and ideas I was going to share. However I am now exhausted, and will leave you with a tl;dr.



---
We have as much free will as a rock. However, unlike the rock, we have a lot, lot more freedom. It's freedom, combined with a self deceiving concept of free will, that is the most important thing to our lives.
---

First part corresponds to all the 'we're just a system' people, whom I agree with, anything else is as egocentric as religion (get a grip on the scale of things: http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/525347 - we are a meaningless fluke).

Freedom part is what I think the people who have been talking about 'but we have many choices' are trying to say. But they, so far in this thread, got that a bit mixed up with free will in itself. They are completely separate things, but you are right to think that the number of freedoms to 'choose' from is a very important factor.

Self deceit bit has been very prevalent throughout this thread with the largely ignored portion of people who have been like "no, but i definitely have free will" or some other jumped to conclusion based on no argument at all. I am not ignoring you, you exemplify my summation very nicely.

And I guess the last few words are my own bit of opinion. I believe that our freedoms are what we should fight for, that living in a non-free life is less meaningful than a free one. For example if you wake up and have to do everything you can to get food and water to survive that day, that is a lack of freedom and something that I want to improve in the world.

If anyone wants further meaningful discussion on this, please get in touch with me. I'm doing a degree in Physics at Cambridge at the moment, but I feel I am going to transition into free will and consciousness for my PhD. This kind of discussion is very useful for me. Mail me at josephheldenhammer@gmail.com if you want to talk further with me.

 

[Tallim]

But let's think this out a bit:do we do anything out of free will?Take for example all the little things you do in your daily life like eating and sleeping and...going to the bathroom.Do we consider those to be out of free will?If free will does exist,then we should be able to have it in every moment of our life.

That is all.

I've fasted and pulled all nighters. And we've all been in a situation where we've post-poned going to the bathroom...For example, someone goes to the theater and orders a large coke. He finds he showed up way early--the previews haven't even started. Absent-mindedly, he continues to drink it. The movies about to start, and the cup is already empty. He quickly grabs a refill and enjoys his second large coke during the movie. Near the end, he needs to go to the bathroom...but the movie is so good! Despite how uncomfortable it is, he waits through the movie and goes afterwards.

Given the right inspiration, even basic needs can be postponed, despite discomfort or pain.

Aha!But touche!You can post-pone these needs,but eventually they force you to go.If I were to give a straight answer(which in my earlier post I couldn't because of my lack of sleep):No-we don't have free will.Yes-we have the impression that we have free will.

That is all.

Hold on now, what of Irom Shirmilla [http://www.kashmirwatch.com/showexclusives.php?subaction=showfull&id=1291812795&archive=&start_from=&ucat=15&var1news=value1news]: a woman who died from starvation as a result of her hunger strike. Surely she was not beholden to her needs. She had ready access to food and yet she chose to die of hunger. There is no greater expression of free will.

Now now.I'm not trying to dismiss such situations.I actually had in my family people that went on hunger strikes.I just used some examples that people can relate to.Personally,I find people that have the guts to stand up for their ideals to be heroes.
That is all.

Well, good sir, all I mean to say is that humans are provably not beholden to their biological needs which, along with the inherently indeterminate nature of the universe, demonstrates the existence of free will.

Ah good sir.I shall one up you!Your example,Irom Shirmilla:didn't she go on a hunger strike because of desperation?Just the other day,somebody from my country jumped of a balcony that was in our parliament because of desperation.Doesn't this emotion defeat the purpose of free will?

Nay, Irom Shirmilla went on her hunger strike because of a decision that she reached under the influence of desperation. In fact, she was originally accompanied by two other women who eventually stopped their hunger strike. Also, observe all the people threatened by India's "Armed Forces Special Power Act" who were not driven to extremes despite being exposed to similar desperation.

The point of free will is that, unless you're being directly controlled, you always have a choice. For example: I could point a gun at you and demand that you eat a cookie. Most people would simply eat the cookie, but if I perform this action to enough different people I will eventually encounter someone who would make the completely irrational decision to die instead of eating a cookie.

Ok I admit.I lost that battle.But for example:remember the Skinner Box episode from Extra Credit?Don't you think that if we are constantly enticed to continue playing even if the reward isn't clear.we don't really have free will?And now you will go and say "But i chose to
do it!",to which i reply "No you didn't!You were forced by instinct and conditioning!"

That is all.^^

Well quite. If we had free will as some people believe then addiction shouldn't exist on more than maybe a physical level. People who choose to do something about their addiction can't normally just decide not to use whatever it is they are addicted to.

A similar thing to the Skinner Box example you gave happens with addiction. To use smoking as an example, a lot of smokers cite enjoyment as a reason they don't want to quit despite the fact that regular smokers don't get any kind of buzz from nicotine other than the suppression of withdrawal symptoms.

It's a bit of a wacky comparison but the base needs of the body can be likened to addiction except that extreme withdrawal leads to death. If you could simply choose how you behave then everyone would easily succeed in dieting and keeping healthy just by choosing to do it.

The main problem with the idea of lack of free will is the question of accountability. If your brain is wired a certain way then you might become a murderer. With free will then that person can be held accountable for the murder. Without free will they were just doing what they believe is the correct thing to do. The only difference between a killer and a "normal" person is how they react to situations.

The phrase "They can't help it" seems rather apt.

 

[iRiis]

A similar thing to the Skinner Box example you gave happens with addiction. To use smoking as an example, a lot of smokers cite enjoyment as a reason they don't want to quit despite the fact that regular smokers don't get any kind of buzz from nicotine other than the suppression of withdrawal symptoms.

It's a bit of a wacky comparison but the base needs of the body can be likened to addiction except that extreme withdrawal leads to death. If you could simply choose how you behave then everyone would easily succeed in dieting and keeping healthy just by choosing to do it.

This is a good example of what can come under freedom (lack of) in my above post.

 

[mjc0961]

Of course there is. I find the question to be silly, but then again, I don't believe in any religious or spiritual stuff. I make my choices, no gods or "fate" or "destiny" control me.

 

[minemin]

But let's think this out a bit:do we do anything out of free will?Take for example all the little things you do in your daily life like eating and sleeping and...going to the bathroom.Do we consider those to be out of free will?If free will does exist,then we should be able to have it in every moment of our life.

That is all.

I've fasted and pulled all nighters. And we've all been in a situation where we've post-poned going to the bathroom...For example, someone goes to the theater and orders a large coke. He finds he showed up way early--the previews haven't even started. Absent-mindedly, he continues to drink it. The movies about to start, and the cup is already empty. He quickly grabs a refill and enjoys his second large coke during the movie. Near the end, he needs to go to the bathroom...but the movie is so good! Despite how uncomfortable it is, he waits through the movie and goes afterwards.

Given the right inspiration, even basic needs can be postponed, despite discomfort or pain.

Aha!But touche!You can post-pone these needs,but eventually they force you to go.If I were to give a straight answer(which in my earlier post I couldn't because of my lack of sleep):No-we don't have free will.Yes-we have the impression that we have free will.

That is all.

Hold on now, what of Irom Shirmilla [http://www.kashmirwatch.com/showexclusives.php?subaction=showfull&id=1291812795&archive=&start_from=&ucat=15&var1news=value1news]: a woman who died from starvation as a result of her hunger strike. Surely she was not beholden to her needs. She had ready access to food and yet she chose to die of hunger. There is no greater expression of free will.

Now now.I'm not trying to dismiss such situations.I actually had in my family people that went on hunger strikes.I just used some examples that people can relate to.Personally,I find people that have the guts to stand up for their ideals to be heroes.
That is all.

Well, good sir, all I mean to say is that humans are provably not beholden to their biological needs which, along with the inherently indeterminate nature of the universe, demonstrates the existence of free will.

Ah good sir.I shall one up you!Your example,Irom Shirmilla:didn't she go on a hunger strike because of desperation?Just the other day,somebody from my country jumped of a balcony that was in our parliament because of desperation.Doesn't this emotion defeat the purpose of free will?

Nay, Irom Shirmilla went on her hunger strike because of a decision that she reached under the influence of desperation. In fact, she was originally accompanied by two other women who eventually stopped their hunger strike. Also, observe all the people threatened by India's "Armed Forces Special Power Act" who were not driven to extremes despite being exposed to similar desperation.

The point of free will is that, unless you're being directly controlled, you always have a choice. For example: I could point a gun at you and demand that you eat a cookie. Most people would simply eat the cookie, but if I perform this action to enough different people I will eventually encounter someone who would make the completely irrational decision to die instead of eating a cookie.

Ok I admit.I lost that battle.But for example:remember the Skinner Box episode from Extra Credit?Don't you think that if we are constantly enticed to continue playing even if the reward isn't clear.we don't really have free will?And now you will go and say "But i chose to
do it!",to which i reply "No you didn't!You were forced by instinct and conditioning!"

That is all.^^

Well quite. If we had free will as some people believe then addiction shouldn't exist on more than maybe a physical level. People who choose to do something about their addiction can't normally just decide not to use whatever it is they are addicted to.

A similar thing to the Skinner Box example you gave happens with addiction. To use smoking as an example, a lot of smokers cite enjoyment as a reason they don't want to quit despite the fact that regular smokers don't get any kind of buzz from nicotine other than the suppression of withdrawal symptoms.

It's a bit of a wacky comparison but the base needs of the body can be likened to addiction except that extreme withdrawal leads to death. If you could simply choose how you behave then everyone would easily succeed in dieting and keeping healthy just by choosing to do it.

The main problem with the idea of lack of free will is the question of accountability. If your brain is wired a certain way then you might become a murderer. With free will then that person can be held accountable for the murder. Without free will they were just doing what they believe is the correct thing to do. The only difference between a killer and a "normal" person is how they react to situations.

The phrase "They can't help it" seems rather apt.

You know,I couldn't agree more.

 

[iRiis]

A similar thing to the Skinner Box example you gave happens with addiction. To use smoking as an example, a lot of smokers cite enjoyment as a reason they don't want to quit despite the fact that regular smokers don't get any kind of buzz from nicotine other than the suppression of withdrawal symptoms.

It's a bit of a wacky comparison but the base needs of the body can be likened to addiction except that extreme withdrawal leads to death. If you could simply choose how you behave then everyone would easily succeed in dieting and keeping healthy just by choosing to do it.

Addiction is a good example of lack of freedom (in the sense of my post above). Again, I think these shouldn't be viewed directly in line of models of freewill.

 

[Jedoro]

Yes, it does, because despite what our brains tell us (logic, emotion, pain), we can and often do make the decision to go against that.

 

[iRiis]

Of course there is. I find the question to be silly, but then again, I don't believe in any religious or spiritual stuff. I make my choices, no gods or "fate" or "destiny" control me.

See my post, two up from yours. You believe yourself to be rational and away from religion, not controlled by "fate or destiny", however I think you are falling right into my category of exemplifying someone who is completely under the (evolutionary beneficial) guise of self deceit about freewill - which I compare to the dogmatic beliefs of those you are subtly trying to better.

Again please also note that whilst yes 'you' make the decisions, the question of freewill is about whether 'you' had some option of not making the decision you did. You may know all this and just be stating that you as a biological machine make the decision, in which case I apologise.

The ability to make the decisions you want is what's more important to understand in our civilisation once we accept there is no 'pure' free will like the old philosophers thought we had. It's about our freedoms in the world!

 

[iRiis]

Yes, it does, because despite what our brains tell us (logic, emotion, pain), we can and often do make the decision to go against that.

Can you really? Can you give just one example of this having happened in the whole of human history? I don't think you can.

 

[Jedoro]

Yes, it does, because despite what our brains tell us (logic, emotion, pain), we can and often do make the decision to go against that.

Can you really? Can you give just one example of this having happened in the whole of human history? I don't think you can.

Simple one: say someone's tired. If there was no free will, the person would meet that need and immediately go to sleep, but who goes to sleep every time they start to feel tired?

 

[UnderCoverGuest]

No. Freewill does not exist. A great mushroom-headed rabbit from the thirteenth dimension of the cloud kingdom cameth upon me and spoketh that it was my destiny to reply to this topic.

I guess I'll keep making breakfast now. Unless I'm ordered by ancient mystical scroll to do up a sandwich instead.

 

[iRiis]

Yes, it does, because despite what our brains tell us (logic, emotion, pain), we can and often do make the decision to go against that.

Can you really? Can you give just one example of this having happened in the whole of human history? I don't think you can.

Simple one: say someone's tired. If there was no free will, the person would meet that need and immediately go to sleep, but who goes to sleep every time they start to feel tired?

There's a difference between giving in to physical stimuli and "going against what our brain tells us" which you originally claimed. In the above case you would only not go to sleep if you brain told you it would be a better idea not to - whether it is 'correct' is irrelevant as we are irrational creatures - for example to stay up and play computer games or do whatever. Your brain has taken all the available stimuli and made a choice, you are slave to that.

But you did say that was a simple one, maybe you want to fire another?

What you are describing is what I described above (on this page) as freedom, which is a quite different concept to freewill. You are free to go to bed or stay up, but the choice you end up making is certainly not a free one, it is dictated by chemical processes etc as I described. Now if you were being tortured and not allowed to sleep, then in this case you wouldn't even have the original choice, so you're restricted to what you can do. This is a lack of freedom.

 

[Sampler]

The way I like to think of it is there's no free will, only our own delusion of it. Whether an action is made either consciously or sub-consciously neither is made of free will.

A conscious decision is made by ourselves weighing up the information at hand, comparing that against past experience and deducing the outcome to take. Our past experiences though are made up of external stimuli so it is that previous external stimuli which is driving our choices that we believe we're making ourselves.

Sub-conscious decisions go a step further from removing our freewill as we don't even consciously weigh up the options and act on instinct - instinct again that's been built up over time by external stimuli.

The nature of fate and pre-determinism means that you have no freewill, you will react to a given situation based upon your previous experiences and chemical layout of your data processing centre (aka brain) which may select to not give you all the necessary facts it may have stored in there in the first place. This has happened throughout all past and will happen throughout all future - thereby time and events are set and unchangeable.

In which event if you knew the history of everybody down to every atom and the chemical layout of their brain along with the entire detail of the environment they're in it should be possible to predict their future with a high degree of accuracy. As technically the events that will inform their future decisions has already happened you could go as far as saying that decision has already been made - even if the poor meatsack hasn't realised it yet.

Your self is an illusion, there is no free thought, you're a simple a bio-chemical reaction to the stimulus fed to you. Even the reaction you have to reading this could be determined if enough is known about you. So when that bus hits you try to at least look surprised..

 

[Jedoro]

Yes, it does, because despite what our brains tell us (logic, emotion, pain), we can and often do make the decision to go against that.

Can you really? Can you give just one example of this having happened in the whole of human history? I don't think you can.

Simple one: say someone's tired. If there was no free will, the person would meet that need and immediately go to sleep, but who goes to sleep every time they start to feel tired?

There's a difference between giving in to physical stimuli and "going against what our brain tells us" which you originally claimed. In the above case you would only not go to sleep if you brain told you it would be a better idea not to - whether it is 'correct' is irrelevant as we are irrational creatures - for example to stay up and play computer games or do whatever. Your brain has taken all the available stimuli and made a choice, you are slave to that.

But you did say that was a simple one, maybe you want to fire another?

What you are describing is what I described above (on this page) as freedom, which is a quite different concept to freewill. You are free to go to bed or stay up, but the choice you end up making is certainly not a free one, it is dictated by chemical processes etc as I described. Now if you were being tortured and not allowed to sleep, then in this case you wouldn't even have the original choice, so you're restricted to what you can do. This is a lack of freedom.

Not quite. Sometimes it's a better idea to go to sleep (i.e. work the next day) but people still don't. Also, hunger: food's sitting right there, no negative consequences, but some people still choose not to eat.

Freedom is whether circumstance allow for a choice to be made, free will is whether you make that choice anyways. I'm certainly not "free" to yell that there's a fire in a movie theater, but I can make the choice to if I want due to free will. Resisting any temptation is free will, because there is the impulse from your brain to take a certain course of action, but you resist because you can.

What about actions with no stimulus? There, I just snapped my fingers for no reason. Who says we don't control some of those chemical processes, or decide when they start? Actions and reactions are two different things, and it doesn't take a complete comprehension of the human body to do something with it.

 

[iRiis]

Yes, it does, because despite what our brains tell us (logic, emotion, pain), we can and often do make the decision to go against that.

Can you really? Can you give just one example of this having happened in the whole of human history? I don't think you can.

Simple one: say someone's tired. If there was no free will, the person would meet that need and immediately go to sleep, but who goes to sleep every time they start to feel tired?

There's a difference between giving in to physical stimuli and "going against what our brain tells us" which you originally claimed. In the above case you would only not go to sleep if you brain told you it would be a better idea not to - whether it is 'correct' is irrelevant as we are irrational creatures - for example to stay up and play computer games or do whatever. Your brain has taken all the available stimuli and made a choice, you are slave to that.

But you did say that was a simple one, maybe you want to fire another?

What you are describing is what I described above (on this page) as freedom, which is a quite different concept to freewill. You are free to go to bed or stay up, but the choice you end up making is certainly not a free one, it is dictated by chemical processes etc as I described. Now if you were being tortured and not allowed to sleep, then in this case you wouldn't even have the original choice, so you're restricted to what you can do. This is a lack of freedom.

Not quite. Sometimes it's a better idea to go to sleep (i.e. work the next day) but people still don't. Also, hunger: food's sitting right there, no negative consequences, but some people still choose not to eat.

Freedom is whether circumstance allow for a choice to be made, free will is whether you make that choice anyways. I'm certainly not "free" to yell that there's a fire in a movie theater, but I can make the choice to if I want due to free will. Resisting any temptation is free will, because there is the impulse from your brain to take a certain course of action, but you resist because you can.

What about actions with no stimulus? There, I just snapped my fingers for no reason. Who says we don't control some of those chemical processes, or decide when they start? Actions and reactions are two different things, and it doesn't take a complete comprehension of the human body to do something with it.

I do appreciate what you're saying but like I said we don't always make the best choice (ie going to bed might be better for us, just 'cos we make a bad choice doesn't give free will, the point is we would always have made that bad choice).

You understand my point about freedom, so I won't go further there.

"Resisting temptation" is a perfect example of your mind weighing up the options and deciding what you will benefit most from. The spontaneity of you clicking your fingers was a way of your mind taking in the stimulus that is our dialogue, and coming to a conclusion to snap your fingers. I'm afraid that you as a biological information processing machine were going to come to that conclusion and slave to the future of you snapping your fingers.

I don't think we actually disagree on anything.

We make all our decisions. Whether they were the only ones we could make if we went back in time is debatable because of the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics. However we both agree (I think, correct me if I'm wrong) that we are a system which processes information and decides to take actions as the result. Or we might even ignore information and act against it if our brains process and come to that conclusion.

What I am trying to say is that there is no 'pure' abstract idea of free will. Something like that can only come if we were somehow above the universe we live in, if we had a spirit or something like that. As it is we're a complicated bag of atoms that is meaningless in the scale of the universe, and as much slaves to it as that poor rock sitting outside in the cold.

[...]

Messaged you my email, lets talk more :]

 

[iRiis]

I refuse to watch the video as I know what neuroscience is about

the thing about neuroscience is that yes indeed if you give small shock to that part of my brain I will slap myself or yaknow generally raise my arm ebeut that is cause you are virtually forcing me to do so with your machinery

Neuro-science -1 free wil +1

That's such a close minded view. You think the world's brightest minds are conducting experiments that your close minded outlook on science can think up off the top of your head?

You are missing much in this world. Having said that, the linked video could be crappy; I haven't looked at it. But your mindset saddens me. I know of some very good neuroscience and psychology experiments that have been done in the realm of free will and consciousness. I won't waste my time digging them up for you though!