rationalskepticism.org

GrahamH wrote:

John Platko wrote:

GrahamH wrote:given things got stuck on whether free will means we make our own selves move or not moving on to 'sholder angels' seems hugely ambitious right now

Perhaps you have a point.

We should probably retreat to a smaller free will problem.



The good folks at Harvard give us...

Now that's better. A far more modest proposal. Whether you turn left or right is either because there are compelling indicators or it's somewhat random.
Aimilar choices in similar circumstances produce different behaviours. Viability of random selections are still subject to some sort of filtering. So will isn't driving but it can do the due diligence on what comes up as a sort of predictive error correction.

I think that all fits well with my weave of strings metaphor. The filter can be seen as part of the web of stings.

It ticks many of the boxes for compatibilist free will.

Towards a scientific concept of free will as a biological trait: spontaneous actions and decision-making in invertebrates

Abstract

Until the advent of modern neuroscience, free will used to be a theological and a metaphysical concept, debated with little reference to brain function. Today, with ever increasing understanding of neurons, circuits and cognition, this concept has become outdated and any metaphysical account of free will is rightfully rejected. The consequence is not, however, that we become mindless automata responding predictably to external stimuli. On the contrary, accumulating evidence also from brains much smaller than ours points towards a general organization of brain function that incorporates flexible decision-making on the basis of complex computations negotiating internal and external processing. The adaptive value of such an organization consists of being unpredictable for competitors, prey or predators, as well as being able to explore the hidden resource deterministic automats would never find. At the same time, this organization allows all animals to respond efficiently with tried-and-tested behaviours to predictable and reliable stimuli. As has been the case so many times in the history of neuroscience, invertebrate model systems are spearheading these research efforts. This comparatively recent evidence indicates that one common ability of most if not all brains is to choose among different behavioural options even in the absence of differences in the environment and perform genuinely novel acts. Therefore, it seems a reasonable effort for any neurobiologist to join and support a rather illustrious list of scholars who are trying to wrestle the term ‘free will’ from its metaphysical ancestry. The goal is to arrive at a scientific concept of free will, starting from these recently discovered processes with a strong emphasis on the neurobiological mechanisms underlying them.