We Probably Don't Have Libertarian Free Will

At first I wondered if I was in the right debate. That is, the debate on “Libertarian Free Will. ” In Round 1 you set the ground work, of this debate, around the definition of “Libertarian” is relative to theopedia. com. It seems Libertarianism has its first recorded roots in 1789 (. http://en.wikipedia.org...), metaphysics was in high gear, the scientific method was new, quantum mechanics was not heard of. In addition, the site theopedia. com makes no reference to quantum mechanics. So based on the history and Pro's Round 1 reference point (theopedia. com) of Libertarianism we are working at the macro-level or finite-size level of physics not quantum mechanics. If Pro wanted to have a debate on free-will relative to quantum mechanics, it should have been known in Round 1. Pro, “There Is No Way For You To Come Up With A Reason For Your Thoughts:”Reason or not, what difference does it make when you have the free will to choose within your life experiences. Pro, “Neuro-Physiology:”Pro moves on to “Neuro-Physiology” ending in the following statement, “So what's all this mean? It means that the mechanism by which a conscious thought is conceived, is unconscious and therefor deterministic. .. ” How electro-mechanics work in the brain at the “Neuro-Physiology” level to develop the metaphysics definition of “Libertarian Free Will” at the macro-level or finite-size level is all interesting, but it has not debunk one’s definition, concept, or experience of free-will. Pro, “An Omniscient Being:”Pro moves on to “Omniscient Being” where theopedia. com deals with the idea of God. If Pro wants to go down that path, the BoF (Burden of Proof) of God's existence is on Pro. Con's position is, free-will comes into existence at the finite-size level dealing with the primitive's of living-systems. That is, once alive “Life,” has the freedom (“Liberty”) in the pursuit of survival; otherwise, there is no life. Survival is a form of positive-feedback, where survival is a prerequisite for the emotion of human “Happiness;” hence, Thomas Jefferson’s discovery of Unalienable Rights of “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. ” The traceability path from Jefferson to the physical Laws of Nature begins with Takac's living-system primitives, which is an outgrowth of Bejan's Constructal Law, which is an outgrowth of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. . http://www.amazon.com...http://www.amazon.com...With Pro's interest in quantum theory, he should start with the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Then, we will have a traceability path from Liberty to quantum theory. In science, it is prudent to establish an inter-physical-law relationship relative to the property of Symmetries whenever possible. But in Pro's case, out of the gate starts with MWI and concludes everything is deterministic via parallel universes, which currently is nothing but theory along the line of metaphysics, yet to be determined scientifically. Getting back to liberty, During Jefferson's time (the Enlightenment Era) the metaphysics of liberty was in high gear, hence, the writings of William Belsham in 1789, on Libertarianism. Based on Pro's stake-in-the-ground definition on “Libertarian free will” along with the traceability path of “Liberty” from classical metaphysics to the physical Laws of Nature, Con's position is, We Have Libertarian Free Will. That is, free-will (aka, freedom) at the living-system level is part of the physical Laws of Nature.