Free Will, Free Won't?

[Zone]

2 things.

1. Being able to comprehend a concept, doesn't make the opinions offered in regards to it, empirically true.

In order to have a concept of freewill you would first have to understand what not having freewill would mean. There wouldn't be a reason for something that had no freewill ever being able to form a concept of itself having no freewill it just wouldn't think about it. So that fact that we do to begin with would be the indicator that we have. It doesn't have to involve anything religious or supernatural it could just be a result of the intelligence being able to override biological function to some degree.

Example: Being able to understand the question: "Is Rap the best kind of music?" Doesn't validate the answer given in response to it.

You would have the freewill to decide whether you personally like rap music I don't think the choice is made for you somehow. You may well be influenced to like it by your culture or whatever but you can override it. Or perhaps you could like it when you're young and when you're older realize that's it's shit. That's a conscious choice being made there.

2. The Android will respond with whatever answer you program it to provide. Just as it unaware of the choice in default language it uses to form its response. If the data given to the droid is consistent with free-will, the answers to the questions regarding it, if asked in the right way, will coincide with the data. In this sense, people are similar, but we can learn to challenge a programmed response. What separates us, is that a computer must operate in accordance with it.

You would have to program the android to give a human like reaction to the question. Though humans aren't made and programmed that way. What I bolded is where freewill comes in.

These concepts are a result of a human being's experience of reality, and the thoughts which are inspired by it; so are computers. Looking to computers for answers to problems created by human thought is putting the cart before the horse.

Computers are tools that humans made and designed for a specific function while human developed naturally out self replicating organic material. What you can't do tell a computer to think for itself as it's only an extension of yourself, you tell it what to think and do.

And I realize that when I say "we can learn to challenge..." It seems as though I'm supporting the concept of being free. I'm not. Because the changes that affect our operating system do not occur consciously, and the conscious mind is where the notion of free-will resides, the changes in the mind seem incompatible with the concept of free-will. I was only eluding to the human mind being able to process concepts of an abstract nature. There is no evidence to support that the intellectual plain of awareness associated with concept of free-will contributes in any way to the change in ones position toward a particular idea. The plain of awareness responsible for that operates apart from our conscious awareness of the effects it produces.

You can only argue in defense of freewill as if you try to argue against it you're claiming to not have your own opinion or the ability to think for yourself which would invalidate your position. So we don't have free choice to not think we have the free choice.