THB: free will does not exist

The first thing I would like to address is Burden of Proof. The Burden of Proof here is not strictly mine. The default is not to believe that everything is false, as my opponent has alleged. The Burden of Proof lies on the individual making the claim. In this case, my opponent has made the claim "THB: free will does not exist." With the motion "Free Will does not exist" I need only show that we cannot know for sure that free will does not exist. Regardless, BoP is nearly always on the one who is challenging the status quo, which in this case is my opponent, Pro. (6; 7)RebuttalsP[1] My opponent makes the claim that no immaterial soul can be demonstrated to reside within us. This is purely speculative. We have no reason to assume there is no soul inside of us, at least that my opponent has shown. It is a possibility, and we cannot simply rule it out because we're told to.P[2] What is important to note here is that my opponent qualified his statement. Everything physical. Emotions, thought process, etc. are not physical properties, but mental ones.P[3; 4] These items imply that simply because our births were, debatably, formed by chance, we have no free will for the rest of our lives. While we ourselves had no personal decision in our birth place, parents, family etc., we still get to make choices today.My opponent has stated that we can't control our genetics, and the enviorment we're born in. Unfortunately, Free Will ecompasses so much more than this. We still make choices of how we eat, diet and exercise which alter our bodies. We still make choices of the friends we chose to hang out with and the people we chose to let influence use. We still get to decide if we want to keep our jobs or quit tomorrow morning. If all of this is true, we have the ability to make decisions which are not wholly determined by external factors. Our internal emotions, genetic make-up, and choices are our own. Enviorment may shape people, but it does not define or control people.Counter-RebuttalsParagraph 1 - The psychology comments bring up how we learn based on our emotions and personal decisions. If we each have emotions and are capable of making personal decisions we thus have free will.Paragaph 2 - My intention is not to debate the validity of religion. I am simply pointing out, based upon the religions I listed, over 75% of the world believes in free will. (8; 9) One may say this is a bandwagon fallacy, but it is relevant to the BoP. If this is the status quo, my opponent must be able to show how all these people are wrong. To say 75-90% of the world is wrong on a given issue is an inexplicably bold claim.Paragraph 4 - My point is that the two fields which should understand Free Will better than any either conflict amongst themselves or conflict with your point of view. If you are going to say that the two fields which should understand this are simply wrong, that is a bold claim you are making.Ending NoteThe claim of my opponent is that Free Will does not exist. I feel as though he is mistaking this with omnipotent will. There are certain things beyond the power of our will, such as birth and enviorment, sure. But this does not change the fact that any individual has the choice to do what they like when they like to.Richard Dawkins famously quotes: "DNA neither cares nor knows. DNA just is. And we dance to its music" (10; 11)This statement is only true if you presuppose atheism and evolution together. Presuppositions are unscientific by definition. Therefore, to say Free Will does not exist is unscientific.(6) - http://www.writingarguments.com...(7) - https://en.wikipedia.org...(philosophy)#cite_note-1(8) - http://www.pewforum.org...(9) - https://en.wikipedia.org...(10) - https://www.goodreads.com...(11) - https://www.goodreads.com...