The Neural Basis Of Free Will : Criterial Causation Essay

Good Essays

As seen in the previous paragraph, Eddy Nahmias’s argument that scientists do not understand the human mind yet is wrong, and creates a hole in his argument. Also mentioned above, scientists say that the human minds simply take in sensual inputs, and make a decision off of these inputs. This argument is acknowledged through the impossibility of self-causation argument which Peter Ulric defines through his book, “The Neural Basis of Free Will: Criterial Causation”, where he explains the impossibility of self-causation argument down to a neurological level. He says that the definition of impossibility of self-causation comes down to mental events and neurological causal chains occurring in the mind, and the inability of these causal chains to be stopped because of the rules of causation. This means that once a mental event is set in motion, it cannot be altered. Thus, scientists often use this argument to declare that people do not have free will because once a mental event sets a physical neurological event in motion, the resulting neurological causal chain of events cannot be stopped, but this is precisely where the solution arises. After outlining the impossibility of self-causation argument, Ulric points out that there is nothing that prevents neurons from changing their firing criteria for future events, and offers the following sequence of events as an example. First, new mental and physical requirements are set for a specific neuron. Then, new inputs are received in

Get Access