PHILOSOPHICAL IMPLICATIONS OF LIBET AND WEGNER ON FREE WILL

Abstract

The conventional notion of free will does not possess formidable counter arguments to modern neurobiological investigations, proving the implausibility of free will. The pool of evidence gathered by cognitive neuroscientists makes strong justifications to truncate the conception of free will. The research of Benjamin Libet and Daniel Wegner explicates the physical and cognitive limitations that make free will untenable. Their position purports that we are neurobiologically determined. However, their empirical assessment of free will misguides their conclusion. Free will as a conceptual problem requires an assessment beyond the empirical domain. Despite the solid claims from neurobiological determinism, it ignores the metaphysical entailment in action. Hence, it gives an unsatisfactory account for human action. To replace neurobiological determinism, this study proposes neurobiological freedom.