[unknown_apostle]

I personally find it highly likely that the decision mechanism emerges from physical computation in the brain.

However, when we talk about decision mechanisms, we inevitably introduce the question of whether this decision mechanism can work better or worse.

“Free will” may be seen as a computational notion of “health” for this decision mechanism, similar to how we use the term health for our physical bodies. A free will is a healthy will, in the sense that our decision mechanism is not broken by e.g. drugs, electrodes or mental illness.

Second, many people, myself included, hold the assumption that the ordering between options A and B is not purely subjective. If there exists an ordering of options which is objective and external to the agent of choice, then the choices that are actually made can be compared to that external ordering. Free will in this sense denotes the observation that our choices may reflect an ordering which is significantly different from the ordering imposed by reality. This is not a scientific claim and cannot be disproven scientifically. Holding this assumption is in fact a choice.

[tremon]

I personally find it highly likely that the decision mechanism emerges from physical computation in the brain.

I think it's more likely that the decision mechanism emerges from a race condition between multiple competing signals. We choose the one that arrives first, even if it takes time to be consciously aware of the choice.

[AlexandrB]

> A free will is a healthy will, in the sense that our decision mechanism is not broken by e.g. drugs, electrodes or mental illness.

Isn't the drug example a contradiction? If my brain was healthy ("free") when I decided to take drugs, why would the resulting drugged state be less "free"? After all, it was my "free" choice to take the drugs and alter my mental state.

Edit: Also the definition of "mental illness" is somewhat nebulous and not historically fixed. Homosexuality was at one point called a mental illness.

[unknown_apostle]

Consider hypnotics used during light medical procedures to keep you awake but compliant. From a state of more freedom you can freely choose to enter a state of arguably less freedom. Why would this be a contradiction?

> Edit: Also the definition of "mental illness" is somewhat nebulous and not historically fixed. Homosexuality was at one point called a mental illness.

Yep, insights and definitions of illness will keep changing. But while insights in the details of e.g. psychosis may vary, few would deny a correlation with chemical issues.

[mensetmanusman]

Excellent to note that it is in fact not a scientific question. You know your epistemology:)