Free Will?

>>9399663
A universe of laws cannot allow for exceptions. Why is there such a hubba? Is it because humans think that they are so special?

>>9399663
is this bait?

harris doesn't think free will exists

I think the empirical arguments against free will are goofy and silly

The rationalist argument makes alot of sense

And specifically Sam Harris' existential argument against free will is very convincing

However, I think it would be very very strange if free will wasn't real

>>9399695
not bait that was my bad I got the names mixed around I meant to include him with Miles. Thanks for pointing out

>>9399663
can you point me to james allen's argument for free will?

I think one's stance on free will depends on one's beliefs about reality in general. I think the universe is governed by the laws of physics, and thus no idea of free will which involves being free from the laws of physics is acceptable to me. If I were pressed, I'd say that free will is a persistent, inescapable illusion.

>>9399897
How did your laws of physics create such illusion?

Furthermore, you can be skeptical of the validity of your experience but you can never authentically doubt your experience similarly to how you cannot doubt your dream is reality until you wake up. Until the illusion ceases, you will perform as if you believe the "illusion" to be real.