Here we go again, science refutes free will

This is a fascinating study but I always remain skeptical when scientists claim to have refuted ‘free will’. Scientists lock man in a box and then claim he can’t move. The problem is that science isn’t playing with a full deck, and the result is a contradictory confusion taken in a larger context. The mind is not the same as the brain, and consciousness has never been explained in scientific terms. Worse yet, the solution to the problem lies in a dimensional context larger than the one science assumes. It is important to go back to the era of Kant and Schopenhauer, figures categorically banished from ‘science’ to see the larger context of ethics, and in Schopenhauer the thesis of the will in nature, the phenomenal and ‘thing-in-itself’ discourses. The format of so-called transcendental idealism cannot ever be allowed to science and the result is the endless confusion over free will. Note that ‘will’ and free will are not the same, and further that free will is not the same as choice. In the eonic model we see that free agency which may or may not be free will is essential to model the analysis of history. The argument goes round and round with no chance of resolution. And we haven’t even mentioned the stance of quantum mechanics whose findings have confounded everyone. Scientists are obsessive here and the larger culture can’t really operate on behaviouristic assumptions.

Source: How a groundbreaking 1964 study ‘introduced a genuine neurological argument against free will’: physiologist –

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s