|
Yes, the external laws are well understood, but what about the internal laws? It's like saying the finite world out there is well understood, so the infinite world within must also be understood therefore. I think you underestimate how much of the world is dependent on our psyches. If there are no beings, what is the use of speaking of a physical universe? Thus, beings are primary, their experience fundamental and non-negotiably there. Physics does not explain nor make any room for deliciousness, the color blue, or the experience of joy, so I think your argument against Free Will is about as real as the notion of Deliciousness in Physics -- not at all addressing the main point. Oftentimes we are tempted to say that "well there is a tiny probability that this tiny book on the shelf negates our whole understanding so far, but that's so unlikely, so let's make laws without examining every last book." And thus, we forsake completeness for convenience, and the very pursuit of truth is subjugated to emotional ease. It's easier to think that there's no free will rather than to consider we are wasting a valuable opportunity. In reality, causality has been demonstrated, and the quantum while interesting in addressing spontaneity can still not address the fundamental question of if or how a seed grows. In that case, consider that what is learned by a yogi or through meditation about the nature of reality, it's learned from accessing wisdom within, which is thusfar an unexplored realm in science. Yet, it is the one we share more intimately than even the rocks and the waves of the ocean and the dip and etude of the solar system. Our real-world experience is unaddressed by physics, so how can we negate the Anthropocentric-realism that we all experience thanks to observations made about the External World? |