The notion that free will does not exist.

You first start out stating that you don't think there are tests to determine if a set of numbers is random. I will refer you to the diehard tests, and here is a link describing the various tests: http://en.wikipedia.org... In response to my quantum physics example, you first claim that it is far from complete. This is true. In many of the experiments, scientists are still trying to figure out the hows and whys of certain things. But even the ones still searching for answers believe in the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. It is because of this principle that one can never find out everything, and therefore can never (even hypothetically) determine all events, including the choices people make, before they occur. The alternate theories explaining quantum phenomena are things I don't wish to explore. I will only let it be known that I agree with about half of quantum physics and then reject the other half. At the point where no more experiments are done and crazy splitting universes and the Copenhagen theory come into play is the point where they lose me. But my problems with these pseudo-scientific explanations does not belong here in this debate. You last point shows the difference between the macroscopic world and the quantum world. I do agree that on this larger scale, quantum physics does not apply. One of the explanations for this is found in information theory. But this does not mean that we must reject free will. Firstly, I will just mention that there is more randomness than superposition. As another example, electrons move around in a random motion in an atom. The position and momentum cannot be determined simultaneously, and when describing the location of the electron, scientists can only encompass a certain area where the electron is likely to be found. This area is called the electron cloud. Now we come to your macroscopic world which does operate differently from the quantum world. Choice, free will, randomness and other such things are concepts. As such they are not tangible. Therefore, nothing can be said of their size. It is simply not possible to claim that will power and choices must follow the physical laws of the macroscopic world. There is no basis for this and nothing that states that quantum theories cannot just as easily claim the realm of will. Furthermore, it is highly impractical to reject the notion of free will. For if free will disappears, then culpability will vanish as well. For how can a criminal possibly be sent to jail if he was FORCED to commit the crime? After all, without free will all actions including the act of crime would be forced. How can anyone ever discipline a child? If the child did something wrong, it would not be his or her fault. There was no free will and such actions were pre-determined. In short, not only is free will possible, it is also practical. We cannot live without such a notion. People must take responsibility for themselves. We have already shrugged off too many responsibilities as a society. The various lawsuits for ridiculous claims shows this. People sue fast food restaurants for causing them to gain weight, drunks sue bartenders for serving them drinks (i.e. doing their job), and a lady can sue McDonald's because she was clumsy and spilled hot coffee on her crotch. These things occurring now are bad enough. I don't want to live in the world where no one has any responsibility for their actions. The notion of free will must be retained. EXISTENTIALISTS OF THE WORLD UNITE!