rationalskepticism.org

zoon wrote:

scott1328 wrote:What is this "ultimate free will" you are referring to? Is it as incoherent as "could have done otherwise". We don't even actually know that our machines are "ultimately determinate" that is to say "could NOT have done otherwise."

These terms are meaningless. There is no way at all possible to decide if something could have done otherwise or not.

I agree with the narrator of your video (transcript here) when he argues that free will is a useful concept in the context of using punishment and reward to modify behaviour.

I also think that if neuroscience had reached the point where behaviour could easily be modified directly by altering brain structures, then there would be no point in using punishment and reward, because altering the structure of the brain would give far more detailed control. Punishment, reward and free will would become redundant concepts.

So my view is that free will is a useful concept in the context of our current ignorance of brain mechanisms, but that it would drop out of use if we understood ourselves fully in scientific terms. It’s in that sense that I’m saying free will is not ultimate.

Certainly, we don’t yet know for certain that we are determinate, but the evidence all points that way?