Free Will Research Paper

In this paper I will argue Sam Harris's opinion on free will is not comprehensive in terms of philosophical view because he does not pay attention on the role played by the spirit level of a person cooperating with the human nerve system; because if there is no such thing as "Free will", we cannot take responsibility of our own action. Whether free will exist is a controversial question philosopher have debated on for many years. Like Sam Harris's opinion that free will is mostly derived from the neurological factors and subconscious, neurologists different from philosophical speculation methods, mainly focus on the experimental way to examine the internal change of brain, the brain of the subject was scanned with brain imaging techniques …show more content…
In late twentieth century, the development of neuroscience has enabled scientists to reveal complex mechanism and function in brain, in this context, Libet assumed that a consciousness mind is nothing more than an illusion in people's experience. Experiment were conducted to prove his Hypothesis. In the experiment he connects an electroencephalogram with the subject's brain, the subjects' EEG(Electroencephalography) response was measured and the subjects were measured simultaneously with electromyography for muscle response. subjects were required to spontaneously move their fingers. After subjects are aware of their intentions and decide what to, it took 200 milliseconds of time to make a slight stretching of the fingers while the signal that connects the brain shows that the potential activity is preceded by finger movements more than 500 milliseconds, which shows that before 300 milliseconds or so when subjects are aware of their actions, the brain produced a preparatory behavior of the electrical activity. [1] Therefore, Libet concluded that "the cerebral cortex of the subjects begin to operate first, follow by the consciousness of the subject to make decision to stretch fingers, this shows that a conscious brain Is not the controller of the behavior "[2]. For most neuroscientists, the results of this experiment is exactly the opposite of their previous …show more content…
Neuroscience scientist Walter Glannon pointed out that the interpretation of human behavior must include unconscious physical state and conscious mental state, as well as our original behavior due to the external event. However, the view of the illusion of free will thinks that it is the brain material implement all of the causal effects, the process of spiritual level needs to rely on the process of neural level. The intention and decision is nothing but perception associated with the preparation of brain activity. This perception is illusory and cannot trigger us to make an action. Gragan criticizes that he believes that the state of mind involves the desire to act, the intention, and the execution of the choice or decision of the act. When the plan and the idea change, the implementation of the different behavior plan Will be contrary to the original intention, it involves the implementation of the choice of the situation. Intention means a plan to do something, decide or choose and execute a plan or act. The desire relates to both the brain's neurotic material and the conscious spiritual level, where the nerve material refers to all the regulation of thought and behavior of the cortex and son Cortical brain area. The concept of any reasonable free will is consistent with the state of mind, and the state of mind can influence the causal effect, ie So that the practice of neuroscience can explain the reasons for the material in the brain, nor can the table The