[whatshisface]

Another plausible view is that it never sneaks in. Nondeterminism would only lead to free will if the mind somehow controlled the nondeterministic outcomes. We know the brain can't do that, so it's clearly a metaphysical question if you want to go further (the mind would have to be an agent distinct from the brain.) The answer to a metaphysical question is not always "no," but you will never be able to prove it.

[fancyfredbot]

I don't get this argument. If your mind deterministically makes a given decision in a given circumstance then that's what your mind decided to do. Another mind would make a different decision. That seems like your mind determined the outcome and that sounds like free will?

[jeremyjh]

The decision is the result of mechanical interactions of the atoms your brain is made of. Unless the mind controls the atoms it’s simply a projection of them. A lot of people are uncomfortable with that idea, but this discomfort is also only a projection and the atoms don’t give a damn about it. Where is the freedom exactly?

[fancyfredbot]

I guess I think the atoms are the mind so if the atoms make the decision the mind makes the decision.

[laumars]

I think the GPs point is that the decision is less about free will and more about programming that has taken place through the lifetime of the host.

For example if someone asks me if I want tea or coffee and I know I don’t like coffee then I’m always going to choose tea irrespective of my free will.

This is just a crude example though, our psychology is infinitely more subtle. We are a subject to our experiences and those experiences start out against our control (due to us being kids). We are also a subject to our biology. If your body produces too much of one chemical or not enough of another then our moods could be drastically affected. We have cravings that are often chemical. Diet also plays a part too.

So much of what we think of as “free will” is actually circumstance that happened before the decision and biological states happening elsewhere in your body.

[jes5199]

sure... but that means the three options are: "free will exists in atomic physics" "free will doesn't exist" "free will exists but cannot be studied". I find only one of these to be an acceptable answer.

[whatshisface]

One of those answers may be acceptable, but their acceptability cannot be studied.

[jes5199]

yeah but you could make this argument about anything. For example: Bacteria can cause disease. Disease is metaphysical. Disease does not exist.

these are not generally considered to all be equally plausible!