When some scientists say that free will is just an illusion caused by the neurons in your brain, then "who" is there to witness that illusion? I mean, isn't saying that we have no free will more like a philosphy than real science? Until you can prove that you have no free will, making a claim like that is pretty irresponcible, because people assume that scientists know wat they are talking about. Its like if you said the universe is a n illusion, wll it might be, but iff you can't prove it, its not science, it requires as much faith as any other faith, agree or not?
I guess you could say "prive free will exists", but you don't have to. If you are going to make a claim that contradicts everyday experience, your the one who has to prove it
please be civil
Tags: