[carlmr]

The problem with this approach is that even if you say that our thinking is non-deterministic because of true random effects on the quantum level, you still have to explain how deterministic calculations on random values make for free will.

You still have no influence on it, even if there is randomness involved.

[cogman10]

You also have to explain why will is changed when the brain is damaged.

Really hard to justify free will (IMO) when a person's entire personality can be fundamentally altered by a bash to the head. What does "free will" mean if everything that makes you you can be changed with, say, a lobotomy.

It is, at best, an illusion and nothing more.

[ruthmarx]

There is no illusion, and brain damage has no bearing on free will.

Free will is simply you making a choice, that's it.

If you want to argue about what 'you' means, feel free, but it doesn't really change anything here.

[n4r9]

What is "choice"? Is it simply executing one of a set of possibilities? If you take such a general definition of free will, then a slot machine is manifesting it's free will to deny you a payout.

[ruthmarx]

Making a decision either on impulse, intuition, or rational preferences.

> Is it simply executing one of a set of possibilities? If you take such a general definition of free will, then a slot machine is manifesting it's free will to deny you a payout.

Sure, or even just a dice. Except that's a rather silly definition of free will since it omits the 'will' part, i.e. thought.