Free Will: Egnor shows true Libet conclusions (Introduction)

by David Turell , Monday, February 08, 2021, 14:32 (1384 days ago) @ David Turell

Libet himself said he did not refute free will:

https://mindmatters.ai/2021/02/a-reader-asks-does-neuroscience-disprove-free-will/

"He found that there was a brain wave from the cortex about a half second before the person was aware of making the decision. Libet initially interpreted this as refuting free will — it seemed that our “decisions” are determined beforehand by physical processes in the brain and we merely experience the illusion of deciding freely.

"But Libet was an excellent scientist so he tested the hypothesis that free will isn’t real by asking the volunteers to occasionally veto their decision after making it — to decide to push the button but to then immediately decide not to. He found that there was no brain wave associated with the veto — i.e., the veto was not from the brain. Thus, the veto was immaterial and independent of brain processes, and it corresponded to free will. Libet concluded that our decisions consist of two parts: a preconscious “temptation” and a conscious acceptance or veto. The temptation was associated with brain activity and might in that sense be considered involuntary (even that is problematic). But the acceptance or veto of the temptation was not determined by brain activity and appeared to be immaterial (i.e. spiritual) in origin. Libet quipped that he hadn’t proven free will per se, but he had proved “free won’t.”

***

"Libet’s research with vetoing decisions has not been tested by other researchers. Research that purports to show determinism to be true is invalid because the neurobiological correlates of vetoing a decision have not been studied since Libet. The current state of neuroscience is that free will is clearly supported by the science.

"The philosophical perspective is that (in my view) the most cogent model of the soul is that of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas. In their model, called hylemorphic dualism, there are two types of mental states — sensitive and rational. Sensitive states are sensation, perception, imagination, memory, and sensitive appetites (emotions), among others. These are tightly linked to matter and may be considered material powers. Human beings also have rational mental states, which are the powers of the intellect and the will. These abstract powers are immaterial — they are not caused by matter — and thus the will is not determined by the brain.

"The Aristotelian–Thomistic model fits Libet’s research very nicely — the material “temptation” comes from the sensitive material powers of the soul and the acceptance or veto comes from the immaterial will."

Comment: It is strange that no research has been done on Libet's second observation that an inhibitory decision has no EEG spike. As I view the soul drives the brain, there should be no spike if no action is to be taken. The delay after a go decision spike has been explained as a preparatory pause by the brain.