Free will is an illusion

Free will is defined as the existence of alternatives in reality in which multiple possibilities occur for what will be, where which among those indeterminate possibilities does occur is determined by an entity through means other than chance. " We live in a world of cause and effect. And as such, all future actions are influenced by the past." The statement "every event has a cause" does not imply that that cause is necessarily another event. "For every choice you make that you can say "I did it for reasons A, B, C", it cannot be free, and given the same conditions A, B, and C and holding all other conditions identical, the same "choice" would be made over and over again." This is essentially a straw man, because condition "A" is chosen goal. Every action I make is made because of, not just the conditions of reality, but also what I seek to achieve in that reality-- or more specifically, whether I seek to achieve-- seek to live. Yet people commit suicide. I do not, because I value my life, the notion of value without choice is meaningless of course. "We do not make choices any more than a computer is not bound by its programming." Humans do not have a programmer, this is invalid. I'm highly concerned that you haven't seen fit to provide a link to your experiment, fortunately, I've encountered it before: http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org... It is really a laughable conclusion from the data, frankly-- first of all, it measures an artificial dilemma in which there are no possible value judgments for picking one over the other, then, it claims that a set of signals which predict a decision with SIXTY PERCENT accuracy (chance would be fifty percent) constitutes "decision." At best, those signals are indicators of only some small set of the considerations involved for the entity. Even if the experiment were accurate, it still would not tell us that the source of free will does not exist in the subconscious mind-- which, since most of consciousness is ITSELF a choice (it requires active effort, it will not occur in default without my initiative, it is entirely within my power to become less conscious) is quite likely. It also doesn't tell us that we don't consciously say (metaphorically) Data about levers here: Value criterion (from free will) here: Subconscious, go! " It is a disturbing picture, because it reinforces the view that we are mere machines, pieces of biological clockwork that have no more free will than a Swiss watch. This sounds counter to common sense, but the more you think about it the more it is clear that much of what we do is done on "autopilot" and that free will is rarely necessary. If you regularly drive to work, for instance, at the end of your commute tomorrow try to remember the details of your journey. The chances are you will not be able recall more than the basics. When top tennis players are asked to think, consciously, about every stroke and every movement, their game falls to pieces. Studies of elite sportsmen show that at the top of their game they are performing in a sort of semi-conscious fugue, purely on autopilot." The extent to which certain routine tasks and certain athletic tasks are best performed while not devoting too many resources to brainpower is, of course, not an establishment that free will doesn't exist, indeed how one would pick a place to drive to or decide they want to win in the first place without a value criterion, the means for such decision making, is beyond me. To realize free will, simply sit still, in a quiet room, and reach out and touch something with one hand, then with the other. Or vice versa. Keep alternating. Notice that no external variable compels you to pick a hand. It's all up to you, to do it, or not do it at all. Now ponder why you have your job-- if you can't trace it to a choice you made about whether to value your life, what reason do you have for it? If you don't have one, quit and find out :). Perception, I'm afraid, is the only evidence possible in the free will debate, direct perception, much like one can't "prove" trees exist except by documenting photos-- and it is not, it happens, posisble to take "pictures" of a persons direct consciousness at this time. But, every reader her has their perception nonetheless (or they wouldn't be reading!). Use it, it's the only source of information that you have in the matter, Pro certainly hasn't provided evidence that contradicts it.