Free Will Exists

Since this is the last round of debate I will use this round to defend my initial argument. My central argument remains that we have the experience of free will, which is sufficient evidence to say that free will exists. Con argues that our experience shows that our thoughts, ideas and choices simply pop into our minds and that we do not have control over which choices pop up. However, this does not fit with our actual experience. Yes, some thoughts may simply pop into our minds, and some choices may be instantaneous. However, we also make choices for which we have considered the available information. The choice to, say, blink might often happen spontaneously, but we also have the option at any given moment to consciously choose to blink or not blink. Con also says that we do not ultimately know why we choose something we choose. Indeed there are some choices for which we put in little thought and do not consider why we made the choices we made. However, there are also choices which we make in which we do no why made such choices. We each have the experience of considering the information available, making a choice, a being able clearly state the reasons why we made that choice. Con then writes the he did, in a narrow sense, choose to post his rebuttal (doesn"t that pretty well end this debate?), but that he doesn"t know why he chose that option. Yet in the same paragraph he told us the reasons that informed his choice " the debate topic, format and deadline. These reasons cannot be said to cause his choice " a deadline do not actually force someone to write something " but it clear the Con did consider his options and does know why he made a specific choice. In his second point, Con and I are in agreement that we should not consider our experiences unreliable. Therefore nothing else need be said on this topic. Finally, concerning our experience of making choice, such shutting our eyes or reading this debate, Con says I provide no evidence at all for his assertion that we have made those choices. Yet it is the experience of making a choice that is the evidence itself. If one were to look at the White House and say, "That building is white," there would be no need to add additional evidence to show that the building is white. The experience of seeing a white building is sufficient evidence in itself. Conclusion: Perhaps all of this debate can in the end be summed up by our experiences. Con writes, "If there is any place to look for evidence for/against free will, I would see human experience as the main source for such evidence, due to the nature of the definition of free will." In contrast, I say that our experiences reveal the existence of free will. So now you, the reader, have the evidence easily available in your own life. If your experience is that you have no choice in voting on this debate, if your experience is that the way you will vote is determined and beyond your control, then you should vote Con. However, if your experience is that you do have a choice, if your experience is that you can consider the arguments made by both sides and decided for yourself which way you will vote understand why you made that choice, then you should vote Pro. The choice is yours.