The Argument from Neuroscience

The question of free will goes to the root of our views about human nature and how we relate to the universe and to natural laws. Are we completely defined by the deterministic nature of physical laws?... Or, do we have some independence in making choices and actions, not completely determined by the known physical laws? I have taken an experimental approach to at least some aspect of [this] question…

Clearly, the brain process (RP) to prepare for this voluntary act began about 400 msec. before the appearance of the conscious will to act (W). This relationship was true for every group of 40 trials and in every one of the nine subjects studied… the initiation of the freely voluntary act appears to begin in the brain unconsciously, well before the person consciously knows he wants to act!

[This… direct neurophysiological evidence in support of the idea that perceived freedom of action is an illusion.]

The Argument from Neuroscience

1) The action in a Libet experiment is initiated by the readiness potential.

2) If (1), then it’s not initiated by the conscious decision.

3) If it’s not initiated by a conscious decision, then it’s not free.

4) If the action in a Libet experiment is not free, then none of our actions are free.

5) None of our actions are free.

Potentially available to the conscious function is the possibility of stopping or vetoing the final process, so that no actual muscle action ensues. Conscious-will could thus affect the outcome of the volitional process even though the latter was initiated by unconscious cerebral processes. Conscious-will might block or veto the process, so that no act occurs.

The Argument from Neuroscience

1) The action in a Libet experiment is initiated by the readiness potential.

2) If (1), then it’s not initiated by the conscious decision.

3) If it’s not initiated by a conscious decision, then it’s not free.

4) If the action in a Libet experiment is not free, then there are no free actions.

5) There are no free actions.