I don't think any scientist, no matter how reasoned, could adequately answer this question -- because it'll boil down to semantics over the definition of "free will", then devolve into solipsism. A better headline would be something like: "Renowned biologist argues his belief in lack of free will."

[–] 14th_cylon@lemm.ee 23 points 10 months ago (1 children)

and that is why math theorem starts with definitions of the terms.

[–] troyunrau@lemmy.ca 13 points 10 months ago

And physics too :)

[–] Critical_Insight@feddit.uk 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Free will is often defined as the capability to have done otherwise.

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 3 points 10 months ago

...which non-free-will folks will argue is irrelevant. You could have done different, if you had a reason to, but you didn't.