/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8485773
>>8485719

to prove that you have free will you would have to prove that to any given stimulus (or: to every current state of the particles you and the universe are made of) there are multiple possible reactions or outcomes. since we can only observe a single result each and every time, there is no reason to believe that multiple outcomes would have been possible.

even if you turn away from the physical aspect of the problem, there are experiments that have shown that decisions are made subconsciously 3 to 10 seconds before we are consciously aware of them. you can't consciously control your subconscious by definition, therefor you are not able to make conscious decisions at all.

i don't know what your definition of 'free will' is, but something you can't consciously change is not something i would call 'free' will or choice. you just _believe_ that you make conscious decisions (since it feels like it subjectively - i'm not saying otherwise), but this is not the case as i have explained above. it's an illusion.

feel free to provide a peer reviewed study that proves otherwise.

>>8292885
prove that you have free will. prove that you can directly manipulate the particles you are made of.