Kialo requires cookies to work correctly.
Free Will or Determinism: Do We Have Free Will?
Observations in science suggest there is no free will.
Evolutionary biology undermines belief in the existence of free will.
Modern science's understanding of the brain suggests it is deterministically linked to human action.
Biological discoveries have been made that explain many internal sources of influence that deterministically determine human action.
The laws of physics as we know them are either deterministic or fundamentally random. Either way, they are out of our control.
To believe in free will is to believe that cause and effect is not absolute. In other words, to believe in free will is to believe in magic.
Free will is not compatible with our understanding of the mechanisms that govern the universe and is therefore more likely not to exist.
Free will presupposes that the 'self' is a metaphysical beeing acting on the physical brain for which there are no evidence.
As technology approaches the ability to simulate the universe, the chances that we already live in a simulation increase exponentially. If we live in a simulation, everything is pre-determined.
Science itself is is driven by determinism. The scientific method is preassuming causality to find the root causes of certain events.
Science only observes systems as deterministic or chaotic, neither of which constitute free will. If we accept free will as a third possibility, we would also have to consider if other non-deterministic systems, such as the weather, had it.
There is no scientific experiment that can determine whether or not we have free will, making the claim that "free will does not exist" materially unsupported.
Free will is not "all or nothing." Even if in theory it does not exist, in practice it does.
If determinism is true, then the our understanding that determinism is true is based on chance conditions of physics and chemistry, not reason and logic. If determinism is false, the conclusion is obviously incorrect.
Some scientific concepts and observations cannot be explained without the existence of free will.
Science cannot explain or understand consciousness. Therefore, this question is outside the bounds of current science.
Science can only help to understand the deterministic component of the brain: tests and empirical evidence fails to test metaphysical constructs.
Observations in sciences are based on our senses, however our sense of our own free will is more direct and fundamental than the senses we use for scientific observation.
Since current scientific knowledge is insufficient to support either argument, all arguments of value are logical, metaphysical, moral or religious.