To claim we do not have free will is an inherently absurd position.
It is claiming to know something is true but at the same time claiming to not be able to freely decide if something is true.
For the unfree zombie truth is just something they are forced to believe.
There would be no reason to think a truth claim from an unfree zombie had any validity.
When an unfree zombie says they won't respond to some other unfree zombie they have made a free decision to not do something.
Even if the unfree zombie is not able to see it.
If the ideas you see as true were not freely decided they have no validity.
No freedom to make judgements about ideas = no valid notion of truth.
The proposition is that 'free will' is an incoherent term when applied to the nature and means of the decision making process.
Too bad you make that absurd claim in a philosophy forum and not a science forum with mush headed idiots.
To claim you have a valid idea requires the freedom to accept some ideas and the freedom to reject others.
If this freedom does not exist than anything you say has no meaning.
It is just something you are forced to say.
Like a windup toy forced to say "mama".
Your position is absurd.
You are claiming to both have made rational conclusions but also to not have the freedom to make rational conclusions.
A conclusion is an act of the will or it has no meaning. Following reason is an act of the will. It is not natural. It is something a person must freely do or it will not be done.
You miss the point entirely. If you actually understood what is being said, you would not be making remarks that don't relate to the nature of decision making.
You, sir, prefer faith over reason.
How Can There Be Voluntary Movement Without Free Will?
''Humans do not appear to be purely reflexive organisms, simple automatons. A vast array of different movements are generated in a variety of settings. Is there an alternative to free will? Movement, in the final analysis, comes only from muscle contraction. Muscle contraction is under the complete control of the alpha motoneurons in the spinal cord. When the alpha motoneurons are active, there will be movement. Activity of the alpha motoneurons is a product of the different synaptic events on their dendrites and cell bodies.
There is a complex summation of EPSPs and IPSPs, and when the threshold for an action potential is crossed, the cell fires. There are a large number of important inputs, and one of the most important is from the corticospinal tract which conveys a large part of the cortical control. Such a situation likely holds also for the motor cortex and the cells of origin of the corticospinal tract. Their firing depends on their synaptic inputs.
And, a similar situation must hold for all the principal regions giving input to the motor cortex. For any cortical region, its activity will depend on its synaptic inputs. Some motor cortical inputs come via only a few synapses from sensory cortices, and such influences on motor output are clear. Some inputs will come from regions, such as the limbic areas, many synapses away from both primary sensory and motor cortices. At any one time, the activity of the motor cortex, and its commands to the spinal cord, will reflect virtually all the activity in the entire brain. Is it necessary that there be anything else? This can be a complete description of the process of movement selection, and even if there is something more -- like free will -- it would have to operate through such neuronal mechanisms.
The view that there is no such thing as free will as an inner causal agent has been advocated by a number of philosophers, scientists, and neurologists including Ryle, Adrian, Skinner and Fisher.(Fisher 1993)''
