Free will does not exist

-This round will be solely for rebuttals. No new arguments will be introduced, so therefore I extend my previous arguments in accordance with that statement. -Responding to my opponent's claims ------------------------------------------------------ "The idea is that large numbers of neurons (a complex of cells or "cell assembly") are likely to be involved in even the simplest thoughts and actions. Tse argues that the brain may be able to modify dynamically the probabilities that individual neurons are "firing. " He calls this "dynamical synaptic reweighting. " Since the process by which a pre-synaptic neuron releases chemical neurotransmitters into the synaptic cleft is a statistical one (large numbers of neurotransmitter molecules must diffuse across the cleft to activate ion channel receptors on the post-synaptic neuron), Tse says that there is some ontological randomness in the process. He argues that this is real "ontological" indeterministic chance, quantum mechanical in origin. How exactly such weights or probabilities of firing might work is not understood, but Tse argues that weights would constitute "informational" criteria as opposed to being simply physical. They could represent mental events that supervene on the physical brain events. Tse accepts the Basic Argument of philosopher Galen Strawson, that we are not free to change the way we are at any moment, that we cannot be "causa sui. " But since ontological randomness can dynamically reassign weights to the synapses, we can change mental events in the future. " ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -The science behind everything that was stated in this passage is fascinating and worth examining to the greatest extent possible; however, I fail to see how this establishes a foundation for free will. The pre-synaptic neurons releasing an array of neurotransmitters across the synaptic cleft in order to active the ion channel receptors on the post-synaptic side is the result of indeterministic chance, which is exactly the point my opponent is trying to make. The mind-boggling unreality that is quantum mechanics remains a mystery that theoretical physicists are still attempting to tame. I agree that these probabilities are not entirely understood, but that does not mean they are free from the constraints of causality. The recesses of the mind are dark and insidious, not readily understood to the utmost degree. Because of this, the observed randomness does not refute my stance, I still hold true to the belief that free will is an illusion. In part, and I will extrapolate on this when I dissect the next portion of your excerpt, because the existence of randomness is not under the control of the conscious agent; therefore, randomness provide any room for free will. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "I argue that it is possible to be a physicalist and ontological indeterminist and adhere to a strong conception of free will. A strong free will requires meeting some very high demands. We must have (a) multiple courses of physical or mental behavior open to us; (b) we must really be able to choose among them; (c) we must be or must have been able to have chosen otherwise once we have chosen a course of behavior; and (d) the choice must not be dictated by randomness alone, but by us. This seems like an impossible bill to fill, since it seems to require that acts of free will involve acts of self-causation. The goal of this chapter is to describe a way to meet these demands, assuming ontological indeterminism and criterial causation among neurons, that does not fall into the logical fallacy of self-causation. "[2] -In layman's terms, that conception of free will amounts to nothing more than 'I do this and not that, and my thoughts are mine, so therefore I am free'. The glaring flaw in this logic is that the multiple paths or options are not contrived by "you". Where is the freedom in having to choose? Your mind unconsciously decides upon an action based off of prior experiences and genetic makeup, and it only appears in your consciousness after the decision has already been made. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Sigmund Freud, said that the "most complicated achievements of thought are possible without the assistance of consciousness". One aspect of Freud"s work in unlocking the secrets of the human mind dealt with the cognitive unconscious"cognitive mental processes that influence behavior without the need for active awareness. Examples of the cognitive unconscious at work include automatic behaviors such as biting one"s nails or shaking one"s leg during long periods of sitting still. In addition to habits, recent research suggests that the unconscious mind also has bearing over decision-making and in some cases, is better than conscious thinking. " "studies at the University College London (UCL) and at the University of Rochester investigate whether the subconscious has the ability to make the right decision. According to the UCL study, snap decisions attributed to subconscious decision-making (low level function) were far superior in accuracy than conscious decision-making (high level function). Participants in the study were asked to identify the only back-to-front image of a repeated symbol (2). In eliciting only subconscious thought, participants were given between zero and 1.5 seconds to look at an image to make a decision (2). To engage conscious thought, participants were then given a longer to time to look at the images (2). The results showed that the subconscious only condition had an accuracy rate of 95% while the conscious condition had 70% accuracy (2). The researchers rationalized that the conscious portion of the mind tends to over analyze information while the subconscious is more attuned to subtle visual differences. Therefore, the subconscious is more likely to spot which image was rotated while the conscious brain rationalizes itself into thinking that a rotated image is the same as the original. As our subconscious has the ability to spot subtle visual differences, according to the Alex Pouget of the University of Rochester, it also has the ability to perform complex mathematical calculations without the knowledge of the conscious. In this experiment participants viewed a series of dots on a computer screen. Some of these dots moved in random directions, while a "controlled" number were manipulated to move in one direction. The objective of the participant was to state, upon impression, in which direction the dots were moving (3). To know for sure (consciously) means performing complex mathematical calculations with probability. However, participants looking at the dots to subconsciously gather information were able to identity which direction the dots moved in as though the subconscious was able to perform these mathematical calculations without the awareness of the conscious (3). " . http://serendip.brynmawr.edu... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "there is no guarantee that he would choose the same sequence as the best one if we could "rewind" him in time and play the sequence over. " -To say this is to say that, hypothetically speaking, if time was to rewind and an individual found himself in the exact time and position of a previous decision, synonymous mental state and identical state of the universe, he would have chosen differently. This is simply not the case, the decisions that your brain contrives are the result of external stimuli and internal composition, both of the aforementioned factors would cause the same result to occur if the exact conditions were met. "because of unconscious activity in the brain that lends us the ability to act otherwise in a given situation. " -Let me ask you this, are you responsible for the intestinal bacteria that thrive in your digestive system? Can you be held accountable for the failure of involuntary systems of the body such as the cardiovascular system? No. The consciousness only comprises a section of the brain, with the unconscious encompassing a vast portion of the brain in which no input can be invested by the "self". "The conscious brain makes up about 17 percent of total brain mass and controls just 2 to 4 percent of actual perceptions and behavior. The nonconscious brain makes up about 83 percent of total brain mass and controls 96 to 98 percent of perceptions and behavior. " Article Source: . http://EzineArticles.com... --------------------------------------------------------------------- -I would briefly like to comment on your statement regarding Sam Harris. The existence of free will is not contingent upon ones religious presuppositions, in fact, Harris acknowledges the fact that a human soul and hard determinism are not mutually exclusive. We possess no more freedom with a soul, than if we don't; philosophical materialism is not a prerequisite for determinism. -I greatly respect Sam Harris and his views on every topic I hold dear, that is why I addressed that statement in the latter portion of your concluding paragraph. It also served as an avenue for explaining my disregard for religion being synonymous with free will and atheism being synonymous with determinism.