Nein. That merely influences my views. But again, I am lucky (I guess) in that my irrational prejudices leave me no option but to accept the most logical conclusion.

If that was true you wouldn't post irrelevant articles that have nothing to do with free will as a desperate attempt to inject uncertainty. You believe in free will in a way that rejects falsifiability in the same way as a Christian brings up the shroud of Turin as evidence of the existence of Jesus. It doesn't matter if I bring up how the shroud of Turin has been debunked because the mere introduction of uncertainty is something to cling to.

Yeah see I don't believe you. I think you throw up logic-y sounding **** to give you a cushion so that you can have your cake and eat it too. You get to be skeptical but also still entertain the idea that you have free will.

Actually idc if i have free will because rather i do or dont has literally no effect on the way i can live my life. Its the same reason agnostic athiest is the most logical position unless you are taking a hard position against specific god claims.

You don't think that the way that brains function plays a role in determining whether or not any decision making is involved with our actions?

There is only one corrext answer to the question do humans have free will?

I dont know.

Agnostic atheists are just atheists. They take an academic logical position but they still don't believe in god and live as if god doesn't exist the same as hardline atheists. It's basically logical aesthetics at that point that atheists on forums argue for the sake of brownie points. It's really not the same thing as a logical position on free will because free will is a concept that is central to human thought in a way that even god beliefs aren't.

No.

I don't know is a half-measure. Whether or not we have free will impacts all of human existence, especially since humankind exists and thinks as if we do. For instance how much of the criminal justice system operates on the assumption of free will? All of it? Or at least as much of it as we can justify so that we can continue to give criminals the stink eye. What if humanity decided to set their emotions aside and accept that whatever might be falsifiable free will is easily the less likely assumption? An end to punishment as justice and an eye for an eye?

The assumption of free will has vast and unquantifiable implications for society and if there is a more logical default stance that probably actually reflects reality and we ignore it then we are ignoring what will probably actually have the most effective influence on society.

Of course none of this matters since we're probably just automatons with no worth but perhaps our existence as a species could be made less miserable if we came to a more reasonable and accurate assessment of the nature of consciousness.

Much fallacy. Much tired. Good night.

Bruh I've had countless mindless debates on internet forums with atheists on both sides throwing around smug accusations of logical fallacies and it's largely a circle jerk. Everyone uses vapid logical frameworks that ultimately end up as justifications for right wing gamergate nonsense because white privilege is hard to prove therefore the left are emotionally pleading snowflakes. You're using exactly that kind of logic and declaring superiority because of it but really you're just mentally stunted.

People aren't magical.

We're just chemicals, compiled into certain structures and in certain proportions.

Understand those particles, and you can perfectly predict every "action" that a formation of matter will take. Even environmental factors and quantum randomness can be injected into the equation and accounted for, though obviously we still have a long way to go in being able to accurately gauge such complex ****.

There is no "ability to freely make your own decisions", when the decision that you make is the only one that you ever would have made given any particular equation of formation that you happen to exist in.

Your personality. The information that you have. Your willingness to seek out more information. Every function of your conciousness, which is entirely dependent on the physical structure of your mind and the neurochemicals within. It's all just particles reacting to other particles.

What do any of your last couple posts have to do with you not meeting your burden of proof and being unjustified in your claim of no free will? I dont really care what internet athiests argue about or their justifications unless they us logical reasoning. Tons of athiests are athiests for bad reasons and the gnostic vs agnostic part is the most important part. Gnostic athiests are just as illogical as thiests except when using evidence to debunk specific god claims ie zeus throwing lightning bolts.

Seems to me like youre the one acting superior claiming to know something you cant possibly know.