Determinism (Neurological)

I want to know people's thoughts on whether or not we have free will. I would like to discuss this strictly from a neurological viewpoint because I don't really want to end up talking about God and the validity of Holy Scriptures because that isn't the intention of this topic.

So, are do we have free will or do we have no real say over what we do?

Famousdebater: I'm a determinist. Though I'm not sure to what extent I believe we are determined. I believe that research from split brain patients is fascinating. I'll very briefly explain why I am a determinist as well as why I'm not completely sure as to how determined we actually are.

Our brain is split into two hemispheres. Our right hemisphere (RH) controls our left vision and body movement on that side. Our left hemisphere (LH) controls right vision and movement on that side. Our brain isn't two parts though and that's because our brains are connected by nerves between the two hemispheres. However an old form of epilepsy treatment involving splitting the LH from the RH. A very strange effect was that sometimes when deciding things such as food they wanted to eat they're left hand could disagree with their right hand and sometimes there left hand would know out an item from the right hand and pick up a different item. This allowed us to deduce that there were two consciousnesses within this one person whereas before the two hemispheres would communicate and decide on one thing through the nerves connecting them.

Our LH controls our speech due to the location of the area in which this is in the brain. Something interesting is that if you only show words in the right hemisphere of a split brain patients vision and ask them what they read they'd say they saw nothing. Because the LH (which can talk) saw nothing. But if you told them to pick up what you read (let's say it said football), the person would be able to pick up the football even though they previously said they didn't know what they read.

When you ask them why they picked up the object the LH attempts to make a plausible but false excuse. So they'd say something like: I really enjoy playing football to try and justify why they picked up the football.

You could ask a question to a split brain patient and tell them to circle the answer and the two hands could circle two different answers.

So what are you? Are you the LH which can speak? Or the right which can't? If you're the right then it's not you that's speaking. But if you're the left then you don't know anybody around you because the RH can distinguish faces which the LH cannot (so if you were LH then all humans and facial expressions would look the same to you).

The LH is constantly having to explain the RH's actions even if it's lying and you don't know that it's lying. Split brain patients allow us to come up with some incredibly interesting arguments with regards to the existence of free will because even in non-split brain patients, we have two consciousnesses in our head. Our right brain is constantly controlling our actions and our left brain is constantly having to justify them - even if this justification is false (and we don't know that).

So are we doing things that we think are for one reason but are really for reasons that a separate, mute consciousness in our brain is making us do?
I'm still not entirely sure how far this theory could go because there's a lot of different ways you can interpret the data produced by analyzing split brain patients.

Feel free to ask questions.

Famousdebater: I believe we have free will, but if you ask me for proof, I couldn't give it to you. I just think that since there is different possible actions that can be taken and we take one, it seems reasonable to say choice is involved. However, a rock doesn't choose to fall off of a cliff or a tsunami doesn't choose to happen and kill certain people, so maybe the human is just like that.

Do you think the property of free will can result from natural process?

Famousdebater: Why does this matter?

Bi0Hazard: Do you think the property of free will can result from natural process?

It's certainly possible. But at the moment I don't think this is where the evidence most strongly leans.

admin: Why does this matter?

It brings our way of life into question. Should we try to be moral when in reality we have no choice over our actions - it is merely an illusion.

Famousdebater: That's where I lose you. Maybe we're predetermined to make rational moral decisions. Just because there's a fixed outcome doesn't imply we shouldn't make good decisions now, doubly so if we don't know the outcome.

Famousdebater: It's certainly possible.
I don't think it is. The properties of free will seem to exist nowhere in our material world (outside of our mind).

admin: Maybe we are predetermined to make moral decisions. But does the fact that we are determined to do things mean that we should do what we want. Because we are ultimately always going to do what we do. If we have no control over what we do, then you could walk across the street and kill somebody right now - you would be determined to do that.

Just because there's a fixed outcome doesn't imply we shouldn't make good decisions now

What you are saying assumes that there is still an element of choice in determinism. How can we even make decisions if what we do is fixed? We may think that we have choice over whether we are good or bad but neurology shows that the ways in which we think and behave are predetermined and are out of our conscious brain's control. Our conscious brain merely gives itself the illusion of free will and choice when in reality its parts of the brain that are not our conscious self that are really behind what we do.

If somebody told you to kill someone else your subconscious brain will tell you not to. Your conscious brain will then have to make you do this. It then comes up with a logical reason as to why you shouldn't do this. You think that you are doing it for the reason that your conscious brain is telling you but this is a completely false justification as to why you are doing this. It's really your subconscious brain controlling your actions behind the scenes.

Bi0Hazard: I agree. That is why I said that it's possible but unlikely.

Famousdebater: I agree. That is why I said that it's possible but unlikely.
I say it is impossible.
Maybe we are predetermined to make moral decisions. But does the fact that we are determined to do things mean that we should do what we want. Because we are ultimately always going to do what we do. If we have no control over what we do, then you could walk across the street and kill somebody right now - you would be determined to do that.
What is the source of predetermining our actions?
What you are saying assumes that there is still an element of choice in determinism. How can we even make decisions if what we do is fixed? We may think that we have choice over whether we are good or bad but neurology shows that the ways in which we think and behave are predetermined and are out of our conscious brain's control.
But certainly you can agree that if someone came up to me and offered me an apple or orange and I chose an orange, that I could of certainly chosen an apple instead. Things don't just happen without a cause, so what is causing our actions (the determining factor)?

Famousdebater: So what? Assume everything you just said is true. My conscious brain has given me the illusion of free will, whatever. Does that justify me going on a violent rampage and then claiming "my subconscious brain did it!" - no, of course not. In fact it's completely beside the point. The whole argument is meaningless.

Famousdebater: We have free will, this is for sure. The simple proof of this is that the only way I can take your post seriously, is if you wrote it by choosing what you write, and not as a robot who is spitting out output from a program. So your own statement that there is no free will disproves itself. Only a person with free can have an opinion.