ofcourse it does. It shows how brain physiology can change who you are. A tumor can do it, drugs can do it as well, even a conversation with a special someone can change your future actions.
Yes, it shows how brain physiology can change who you are. So what? Trauma can also turn you into a vegetable. If you have lost a free will*(let us assume it exists) because of trauma or any other physiological changes it doesn't mean that free will doesn't exist at all. Changes means only that you have a deal with new circumstances.
- Free will - the ability to choose how to act.
Free will is the ability to choose between different possible courses of action.
Have you proved that inclination 100% leads to action? Prove it first than we will talk about it. Can your opinion without any support serve as a strong argument? Surely not. A deductive argument is sound if and only if it is both valid, and all of its premises are actually true but your premises are false hence your conclusion is false.
There is no need for him to make. You are the one making the allegation that free will exists. Again, you are intellectually dishonest since you provide no evidence for it.
Intellectualy dishonest?))) What an argument)))
Mentioned study only states that we can predict with a 60% probability what button will be pressed. As i have said earlier the results are interesting, still they can not serve as a proof. Let's measure more complex tasks first but before it's done you have no scientific support for your claims. 20 years of thorough study the author said. Your personal interpretation of a particular study can't serve as evidence.
So what do we have here? Unsounded arguments and link to an academic study that doesn't make any claims that can support your conclusions and states the necessity of further research on the matter.
P.s.
Alexis fairly pointed that such kind of topics need more thorough approach. I also think so. Try harder next time or you will always end up with such superficial articles as this.
You are still left with a negative. You need to demonstrate that it exists. Assuming that it does (whether pink flying elephants of free will or god) doesn't cut it. The burden of proof is not on me. I just provided sufficient evidence that it is impossible to exist.
That's not what I mean. Ofcourse we all choose how to act. The point is how that is influenced. How do we know it is ours and not influenced from other things?
There is no need for "thorough" examination. We have a very basic question here. Humans are the product of their environment. Our parents, friends, family, food,. everything contributes to what makes us, us.
The question for someone who believes in free will is simple. How do you know that the actions you choose to take are yours and not influenced by someone else?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You haven't defined the "free will" in your article.
If we will define "free will" as an infinite possibilities not limited by anything than "free will" doesn't exist. Give a definition first and then we can have a serious dispute about that.
If your statement in that actions are influenced by something than you're right. Someone should be an idiot to state the opposite. But influence does not equal determine.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Indeed I haven't. perhaps that was a mistake. Here it is
Definition: Free will is the assumption that human beings can take actions or make decisions independent of environmental stimuli.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It's not a definition. Let me rephrase.
"Free will is the ability of human being to take actions or make decisions independent of environmental stimuli."
Agree?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
For me is assumption though. Anws. yes. go on.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Next you should define what is environmental stimuli.
For example,
Environmental stimuli (in cognitive neuroscience) refers to pictures or objects one sees in daily life presented in laboratory experiments to create the feeling of viewing natural images.
We need some consistent basis that won't allow much room for different interpretations.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Environmental stimuli involves the perceptual and biological input a human interacts with either directly or indirectly — such as via language, impressions, experiences, bacteria, drugs and weather
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Good. Let's go next.
Is that all that environmental stimuli involves?
What is perceptual input?
What is biological input?
What do you mean by indirectly? Does it means that if have ever had any experience from external input than you're affected?
How to estimate dependency or independency between acting, decision making and environmental stimuli?
P.s Some questions can arise concerning sensory deprivation. How to consider actions and decisions influenced by sensory deprivation?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit