There is no free will.

Rebuttals to Pro"s contention: That is why there is scientific experiment for us to ferreting out the nature of reality is. 1. It seems as though the best evidence for free will is that we feel like we have it. No , I have proven examples of free will in my case. 2. Atoms are 99.9999999999996% empty space. Wrong, they are 99.999999999999% empty. My opponent tries to say that AN ATOM is 99.9999999999996% empty. http://education.jlab.org... The example that my opponent gives is fallacious. He assumes that everything he knows is true like the rock case. A is lack of knowledge by that time thus he stands with his points. After reading articles or doing research, he found out that he does not have that knowledge about it. I would like to note that Free will=/=unrestricted choice is wrong. Free will can be defined as chance choices. http://www.debate.org... Refutations : You can choose not to take drugs. This has proven that the choice influences the outcome of something. Intelligence is not advisable to be measured as they can change over time. 1. Drugs You are free to choose to have drug or not. After I take drug. I suicide. If I don"t take drug, I am still alive. Making the right or wrong choices is another subject matter. As long as I can think, I can choose to take it or not. 2. A person may suffer from Alzheimer's disease and make very different choices that when they didn't have the disease. What causes him/her to have Alzheimer"s disease? In the previous years, he/she might not do regular exercise, have a healthy diet, lack of mental stimulation, low quality sleep, did not manage stress properly, and causes Alzheimer"s. http://www.helpguide.org... The person chooses to do it although some if not everyone has advised him/her at the beginning of time. If she follows the advices, she might not get Alzheimer"s disease. Yet, she chooses to IGNORE them. Disease is defined as a disorder of structure or function in a human, animal, or plant, especially one that produces specific signs or symptoms or that affects a specific location and is not simply a direct result of physical injury. https://www.google.com... If I got disease, I make choice A. After I got disease, I make choice A. Does that mean that disease has violated my choice not necessarily? Note, it is still you who make the choice. Chance and choices are given. 3. There isn"t any reason for us to believe that they must take that decision. In universe A, I pick blonde. In universe B, I pick brunette. Does this mean that the person in universe A is more rational? Or, he who is in universe A is irrational? My motivation or whatsoever asks me to choose it. It is still me who makes the choices. Your motivation is random and not determined right. This has again proven randomness. 4. Personality traits, Phobias and some which have been mentioned and some are grouped under maximal autonomy. A personality traits and phobias still can change. I am anti-social. After I meet B, I love and start to socialise. I still can be antisocial in I wish to. 5. (Objections to E1) A human still can restrict his/her "biological desire". I want the girl. But, if I get her, I will be poor. Hmmm, I still can continue the act or choose to stop it. To be or not to be? That is a question -William Shakespeare. Yet, they still can choose. And, we still can restrict our motivation.(responsibility) But many support A, I don"t like to follow the norms. So, I support B. The motivation (unconscious) is random right. This shows that it is random and supports my points. Bob"s choice to let unconscious to make the decision is the evidence for free will.Unconscious comes from the random combination of many things. This has proven chances which have been combined and created. Actually, Pro intends to show that our choices are determined by prior causes. So, it is false. Refutation to E2: It is not compulsory for Bob to drink coffees. Note that the choices are given. Bob is aware and he thinks it is necessary to drink coffees because ... Bob knows that coffee can keep him awake and away from tiredness. Thus, he thinks and makes the right choice. Is it irrational if I drink milk instead of coffee? Where does a stronger reference come from? The unconscious combinations of thing in the mind. This shows that free will is possible because future is not determined, if we look closely, that is a random event and occur out of Bob's expectation. One more thing that I would dare to ask if Bob is really focused on what he is thinking? I believe my opponent cannot answer that because he is not Bob. Will it be irrational if Bob choose the other girl? I would like to say that no free will means no rationality. Back to the idea of Soul and Materialism/naturalism view. Nature is complicated and multifaceted. It includes many different sorts of things and one of these is human beings. Such beings exhibit one unique yet natural attribute that other things apparently do not exhibit and that is free will. We also notice that human beings do all kinds of odd things that cannot be accounted for in terms of mechanical causation, the type associated with physics. Human is not purely physical being because of its immaterial mind. If human is purely physical, free will cannot present. But now we know that human is not purely physical. Therefore, free will presence in human. As claimed by opponent all things that are made up of matter is governed by the law of nature. But now human is a being where it is not purely physical. So, free will exhibits in human. Why mind is not matter? We cannot tell how large our mind is nor can you? Mind is mental. Defences of randomness: I would like to claim that Pro misunderstands my point of randomness. Random is something that is not determined. If everything is determined, then randomness is not possible. But I have shown that randomness is possible through the radioactive particle decay and Heisenberg"s Quantum Mechanical Uncertainty Principle. Why randomness does prove free will? If everything is determined, then there won"t be any random event. Randomness implies ambiguous future. Which means future is not determined and we are uncertain about it. Likewise, my case still stands no matter what happens. My opponent tries to say that we got x percent, y percent and so on to make probability becomes his case. If determinism is true, then there must be an objective answer. Still they are subjective.. Which means we are uncertain about the answer? If determinism is true then the future shall be determined. In this case, we still not YET know what the answer will be because it consists of probabilistic answer. That being said, future is not determined. The dice falls in the ground and produce a probabilistic answer. Defences of Rand: "Thinking requires a state of full, focused awareness". Therefore we must stay in focused state in order to think of something which we intend. If we let our mind wonders, random thoughts are generated. As for thought, I have explained in the unconscious part. The thinking that I mentioned in the previous round is conscious thinking. (Decision before the decision) Defences of Quantum Physics: Quantum physics did not fail but it was a success. Randomness has become a necessary for free will. What my opponent says is true about quantum physics. But, one thing he did not notice is that quantum events are happening in our brain. Free will is the method my which the brain processes the combination of random and non-random events. Free will is the algorithm in the brain. The research team took the theory of determination and decided to study the reactions of 278 people. They were given a futuristic story about a woman who wears a special skull cap that images her brain and predicts with 100 percent accuracy her future predictions, even how she'll vote. When people stop believing they have their own free will, they are more likely to cheat and less inclined to punish others who commit wrongs... A surprising 92 percent of participants said she would. However, when researchers gave her a new story about a skull cap that could manipulate her choices, most participants said Jill didn"t have a free will to vote. http://www.medicaldaily.com... Most people"s intuitive conception of free will appears to be the freedom to act on one"s own desires, even if those desires are determined by our experiences, our genetics, and the laws of physics. It"s only when one is forced to act on someone else"s desires that free will disappears. Defence of responsibility: When we talk about responsibility, it comprises of two things which are control and think. You can either choose to work or rob. Look, the choice is yours. (The story by Pro). As for priming, does the answer given by the witnessed are more rational or irrational. This has again proven choices. Rationality: P 1: If hard determinism is true, rationality does not present. P 2: Rationality does present. C: Hard determinism is false. I (computer) tell A that a table is liquid and I tell B that the table is solid. Both of them mindlessly accept whatever I tell them. Does B behaves more rational than A? No. Yet, if we have correct beliefs, hard determinism still undermines rationality. We simply have no reason to accept the mindless, blind and physical cause. http://www.debate.org... Many philosophers have puzzled how an agent could do otherwise in exactly the same circumstances. Since humans are intelligent organisms, and given the myriad of possible circumstances. http://www.informationphilosopher.com...