"Free Will" Belief/Disbelief Poll

[theVOID]

What the fuck have you been smoking Jason? Just because something is a concept does not mean that the thing it points to does not exist. If we have 'free-will' in the contra-causal sense then we have freedom of action that is non-contingent upon our physical caused being, or at least some part of our physical being is acausal - This is what 'free will' means in by far the most commonly used definition. I argue that there are no acausal events at that scale, and even if there were, an acausal intention, which is absolutely required, is even less likely to exist.

I agree that it doesn't matter, in either model the actual will displayed is indistinguishable, be it caused or not we still experience the same thing. What ultimately lends weight to this debate is the existence of the necessary phenomenon in each circumstance. In the case of determinism (at relativistic scales at least) we have extremely good evidence for complete causality in all and every circumstance, ruling out free will if we stick with what is known, where as with 'free-will' we require acausal events, something that is not known to exist at all at relevant scales (or potentially at all).

Thus free-will requires the assumption of the existence of a phenomenon for which we have no evidence at the relevant scales, you can call occams razor into play here, and since caused will requires less assumptions it is the preferred explanation.