Scientists are rethinking free will. I have a brief summary.

We do have free will. Even when a stimulus is processed and our entire body reacts to a homeostatic stimulus, physiologically, neurotransmitters are involved. It will probably produce instinctive decision-making. But we can override this process. Think of feeling urged to make an impulsive decision, but suddenly thinking about your partner might have to say something about it. And you can reason about this state of affect and change directions. Buying a house and sticking to a mortgage is, in large part, stimulated by states of affect, but often well over-written by taking the decision of multiple parties into consideration, like an advisor, and sometimes it leads to going against the instinctive, value-laden process, which would lead to contradictory decisions. Machines have no free will because there is no conscious override. Think for a moment of the process of delayed gratification: seeing something admirable, your whole body goes into a state of cravings, but your experience of memory and your prefrontal cortex will, probably, slow the process to act. Also, this simple phenomenon is a great indicator. As kids. It is all phenomenology. We cry because we want ice cream. That toy at the store. We are hyped and want to jump from the climbing frame. And even tho we might produce maybe a minimal process of the same things as adults. Like the cravings and sadness. But our well-developed prefrontal cortex and executive functions clearly overwrite it, in a well-considered, conscious, influential manner. That is, to me, free will. Even when urges, instincts, desires, and states of affect intensify the directions we want to take. The fact that we can decide to count to ten. Or ask a third-party perspective for advice, or delay the decision-making, is free will.

There's never been any real support from science for the idea that free will does not exist. Ultimately that boils down to an argument from incredulity: "our actions must be produced by a deterministic or random mechanism, because I can't imagine anything else".

The concept of free will (the idea that we could have done something different with the same start point and same inputs) doesn't even make sense. Free will is a feeling. It's the consciousness that's the mystery.

Sabine we need antigravity, stop wasting time on nonsense ~

Meaningful free will is not the ability to choose independently of causation, but the creative capacity to become increasingly aware of the forces shaping our choices and, through that awareness, learn to navigate the constraints of reality. All any of us truly have is Our Story, but our story is not reality. It is our interpretation of reality, shaped by our experiences, beliefs, emotions, instincts, and often unconscious motives. As we live our lives, reality gets a vote in the direction our story takes. What happens to us is called Life. Our willingness to examine our own part in what happens is called Getting Honest. Through this process of honest reflection, we become increasingly aware of the forces influencing our choices. We learn from the consequences of our actions, recognize possibilities we previously could not see, and expand our capacity to respond rather than merely react. True freedom, then, is not freedom from constraints, but the growing ability to navigate within them. That is how we acquire Navigational Wisdom—and how meaningful free will becomes something we develop through the experience of living.

Any man that is married will tell you that free will is utter bullshit.

If it's not free, it's not a will.

Sounds more like testing predictive reasoning. Predictive ability is an advantage for predators and prey. Does prediction interfere with Free Will? One can choose to ignore it I guess.

Scientists who reject subjectivity can have nothing to say about will-ful consciousness.

Meaningless words if 2e don't first define consciousness.

Free will is free, changing without external reason will. Humans have free will: their will changes through ideas and biases (eureka moments).

Which finding is driving the rethink? I’m curious whether it revises the timing of conscious decisions, or challenges the stronger claim that agency is just an illusion.

Yes, humans have free will. 😊 That's fact. A quantum physical, nonlocal fact, if you will. Good god, can we please end this superfluous discussion? 🤣

We each have a will. "Free" is a dumb category which nobody can define.

.

This is what I said when this paper came out. It takes a moment to make a decision. How does this have anything to do with not having free will? If your view of the world is purely materialistic, will itself doesn't exist.

Most human functions can be done without conscious interaction. Even sleepwalking can be done subconsciously. Gag reflexes, sneezing, self-defense reactions all occur without conscious intervention. Evolution provides this for survival. Consciousness is not required.

I don’t know let me ask my wife.

There is an automatic computational process in the brain. And then there is the silent observer. Our consciousness is able to stop these programs and override the brain’s automatic actions.the brain sends a signal saying,“I’m hungry;then: observe: s“No, I don’t want to get fat :D

First of all, a majority of all our decisions are based on instincts. Secondly, we all suffer from multiple personality disorders. Try cutting the corpus callosum - as multiple experiments have proven Thirdly, our so-called consciousness is a simulacrum. We for a fact that movements are initiated before the simulacrum thinks it initiated them. At least that means that I am totally innocent of all the BS I write. Do not believe a word of it. I really don't. ;-)

This topic is about as compelling as Flat Earth - it's manifestly foolish

Well, you do or you don't. No decision is a decision.

But being limited by your body as your body can only allow certain choices within your reality.

Off-topic: since the Botox and Thiel's patronage her voice sounds even more like clenching teeth.

Free will of whom? Of What? “Free will” assumes there’s a little “me” inside my head. However it’s probably just an illusion. An emotion emerging in a biological brain that dreams to be “someone”.

I’m building a dimension for creation, also I like the questions raised by the psychology questions afterwards more than the place it left off.

The Conway-Kochen theorem shows that if we have free will then so do some elementary particles. 🤔🤔🤔🤔

Current AI will not help on this set of problems. Artificial Neural Nets do not, I repeat, do not model the brain in any shape or form. Please, do not tie your statements to any current AI. Nobody knows how the brain works. Physicists are the worst part of that crowd.

Interesting, tanks

Sabine, listening to you at 1.25x is much better (for what it’s worth)

If you’re interested in this topic I recommend Includes a deep argument why quantum processes can’t rescue “free will.”

choices can be free, where the foundation of what gives the choice predetermined. that's mute point anyway. all choice is chemical reactions of the controller anyways. even in simple physics systems. path a and b both have separate weights. straight line vs curve.

What if free will is nothing more than a limited possibility space of future outcomes?

If free will is an illusion, then so is time.