Free Will

One of the oldest problems of philosophy is the "Problem of Free Will". The 'problem' is that we tend to believe that we choose what we say and do. Whereas, scientifically, there is no basis for this assertion. Just as particles flying around in the air have no 'will' of their own and no 'choice' as to how they move (it is evident that they obey laws of physics), so too must the particles in our brain. Therefore we do not 'choose' our thoughts, emotions, opinions, or choices, which are all very much determined by our brain activity.

Some have proposed that we therefore cannot be held responsible for crimes that we commit. After all, if our brain states are entirely dependent on laws of physics, then we could hardly have 'chosen' to do something in violation of a law of physics. Others counter that juries and judges could hardly have 'chosen' something else than to sentence a criminal as they see fit.
The idea that we can't choose what we do doesn't make any intuitive sense - we believe that hearing a prediction of what we're about to do allows us to alter our behaviour to prove this prediction wrong. That, if somebody predicts we will raise our right arm in 10 seconds, we can stop ourselves from doing so (Although brain scans reveal 0.2 seconds before I actually do so AND before I know that I will do so, that I WILL definitely lift my arm). This may prove that hearing a prediction invalidates that prediction within certain time windows, or it may prove that it's impossible to prove what another person will do, under all but the most limited of circumstances or only over very short intervals of time (see Chaos Theory and combine your knowledge of this with knowledge of the Uncertainty Principle). For example, after you finish reading this sentence, over the next 0.1 seconds you are likely to continue reading. When you step on a nail you will hop around afterwards etc.
Or it may just prove that various parts of the brain process information with different delay periods.

Many contradictions around free will exist too. For example, the claim of various religions that you have free will, and yet God Knows All, including everything that you do will do in the future. If God Knows what you're going to do, you could hardly choose to do something yourself!! And if you have free will, you never chose whether or not to have free will!

What I am certain of is that
** Free will is restricted to the domain of our knowledge. If I am unaware that there is a party at 4 Umbrella Road, Blacktown tonight, then I do not have free will to go to this party. After all, the next morning, I’d rightfully claim that I wasn’t “free” to go to this party or any of the others that I was unaware of. One would need to be omniscient to make a decision that is truly free, thus based on a consideration of all available options.
** Language is a problem. What does 'free' mean, when we talk of "free will"? We seem to use it in different senses -- eg 'freedom' (absence of being in jail) meaning an absence of constraint, versus the normal usage. 'Compatabilists' say that our BELIEF that our actions are free are what makes them free, regardless of whether or not this is an illusion
** The illusion that is free will is strengthened by the fact that we change...because we are constantly becoming a different person, our decisions, thoughts and actions often seem novel to us and chosen by us, whereas to an older person our behaviour was more predictable. The reason you thought mum was so smart was that she could predict what you'd do and she had lessons which she knew you'd learn.
** Its obvious, upon analysing what you do all day, that you do not have free will in all senses. You do not decide “Should I do 100 push ups on the roof, and then eat my own shit, jump in the pool and then screech at the bird in the tree at 43Hz?" It is no wonder researchers at scientific institutions often have to publish their papers in E-Prime in order to not be laughed off campus. If I asked you to kill me now, could you really do it? Could you really?

--- Note that the true picture, the world as a probabilistically determined system that works according to Quantum Dynamical properties has been ignored in this post, although similar dilemmas related to free will exist anyway under this system. When you incorporate this, it looks as if our actions are not predictable but also are not free.

**** Reason is a bullied child