Does science have anything to say about our freedom of choice?

Looking for a link we mentioned? It's here: https://linktr.ee/philosophyforourtimes

A famed experiment, by Libet in the 1980s, led many scientists and philosophers to argue that free will was an illusion. Despite the experiment being challenged at the time and in recent studies, its legacy persists. Many materialists still contend that free will has been shown to be illusory, supporting their belief that humans are merely biological machines. We often imagine that experiment settles the matter, but should we instead conclude that our interpretation of experiment is a function of our desire to believe its outcome? Or can empiricism really determine the existence or non-existence of free will?

Prolific British writer, philosopher and co-founder of The Philosophers’ Magazine, Julian Baggini, renowned Australian philosopher of science, Peter Godfrey-Smith, and leading British neuroscientist and UCL professor, Sarah Garfinkel, argue about empiricism and its role in determining the existence of free will. Alex O'Connor hosts.

There are thousands of big ideas to discover at IAI.tv – videos, articles, and courses waiting for you to explore. Find out more: https://iai.tv/podcast-offers?utm_source=podcast&utm_medium=shownotes&utm_campaign=the-future-of-freedom

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Can experiments settle the free will debate? | Julian Baggini, Peter Godfrey-Smith, Sarah Garfinkel

Philosophy For Our Times

Can experiments settle the free will debate? | Julian Baggini, Peter Godfrey-Smith, Sarah Garfinkel