Argument 1: Common Sense Intuition: Humans appear to have choice, so the burden of proof lies on those disputing what is experienced as true by billions.
Argument 2: An ought implies a can, and a cannot implies an ought not. Without free will, the agent cannot control what it does, so cannot be held morally responsible. Hence moral responsibility fails. And, without moral responsibility, the reactive attitudes such as praise, blame, contempt, admiration, lack foundation as well.
Argument 3: In general, evolutionary processes select for traits with adaptive benefit to the organism. The appearance of free will, if lacking causal efficacy, will have no adaptive benefit. So, probably, evolutionary processes would not select for organisms wasting resources generating epiphenomenal experiences of choice.
Argument 4: beliefs are considered knowledge when reasons cause those beliefs, and not considered knowledge when blind processes cause those beliefs. If free will is false, the beliefs of knowers do not cause the conclusions of knowers, rather, those beliefs are caused by blind microphysical processes determined to occur prior to birth. So, humans would have no knowledge. So, those who know free will is false would not know that. So, the belief that free will is false is self-stultifying.
I gave this judgement because human is easily affected by various factors. You make a decision based on your feeling and thinking once in a blue moon . I will take my country as an example. In my country, before getting married , you have to bring your partner to introduce with parents. If your parents don't give eye to eye on your idea partner, you have to break up with her/him ,but if you are determined to get married with your partner at all cost, from time to time you will be abadoned by your parents and to name but a few. Or in my country, free will seems to be impossibile because not only is freedom of speech also held back but also demonstration is forbbiden. From my perspective, free will is out of the question in some parts of the world , but that doesn't mean free will doesn't exist.
I believe free will is not just possible, free will exists. If there is no free will, then moral language would be meaningless. We don't moralize to machines or animals. When a vending machine fails to deliver your drink or snack, you don't appeal to its conscience or tell it to go to confession, you kick it. If humans do not have free will, then there is no moral responsibility. And if there is no moral responsibility, there is no civilization. If all we have are animal instincts, then the strongest instinct would always win, but sometimes it doesn't.
I do not believe in it but I can not deny that it has made me think about it a lot. I mean, when you think about it, we should not even exist. What even are we? Are we the information that is processed in the brain? Are we some physical part of the brain? Why do we exist? Why do we feel like we have control? I think there is a core idea in the universe we have yet to understand. And it is about ourselves. Because there is so much we do not understand about ourselves, I think free will is possible.
Essentially, humans are no different than the rest of the universe. Boiled down, we are nothing but advanced chemistry. Mental states(let's say you are crabby and decide to snap at someone) are brain states, and brain states are biological states, and the biological is physical... And the physical world is deterministic, to a large extent. For example, if we knew all the factors, variables, etc that affected the weather, we'd be able to predict the weather with 100% accuracy. However, we can not, which is why weather forecasts, as some may find, lack of dependability.
The quantum level may be indeterministic in nature. Some would argue that would make everything else indeterministic, thus free will for us is possible. However, just because it's indeterministic doesn't mean free will is any more likely to exist. This would imply that our actions are random/can not be determined, and that's not the case at all.
While everyone chooses what they will do next, will I take a shower? Will I go out to eat? Should I go to sleep now, or study a bit more? In the end, necessity is what drives us. We will eat when we're hungry, sleep when we're tired or stay up if we have a deadline. Our need for something sweet (because we do need sugar) makes us go buy an ice cream. Our need for entertainment makes us go see a movie. When everything you do is based on a need, even if you make the final choices in the end, like which movie are you going to see, or what kind of dessert you will get, is it really free will?
Consider the question: “ In exactly the same situation would you make exactly the same decision every time?”
Suppose the answer is yes. In this case your decisions are essentially a function of your surroundings. You take an input which is all the information about your situation and turn it into an output which is your decision. All you are doing is following a set of rules which have been running in your brain since birth like a computer program. I do not think most people would consider this to be free will.
Now suppose that the answer is no. Since there was nothing different about the situation the difference in outcome must be due to random chance. In other words every decision you make is a random event. Personally I can’t consider this free will as you are just doing things as chance dictates no different to a radioactive nucleus.
If you put the same person into the same room and ask him to do the exact same thing, in 2 different (hypothetical) universes, the outcome would be identical. How we act/choose and thus our 'will' is based on a great amount of factors, many of which are beyond our control. Though it is us that is making the choice, this choice would always be the same. Our thoughts and actions are based on what we see around us, and what has influenced us throughout our life. Therefore though we may perceive what we are doing as under our own volition, it is truly based on our influences and thus not properly of our own 'free will'.
Hypothetically, your driving your car and come to an intersection. This would imply that you have a choice of which direction you can go (free will). Problem is, only one road will take you to your desired destination, so you were never going to take any other road (no choice). That is life.
Note: Some may think this would just be a reason to get out of punishment. That they could claim they had no choice. Thing is, if you accept that everything is inevitable, then so is the punishment.
Now we can all agree that free will is not ever going to be achieved in todays world because what happens after is devastating, it will cause a State of Nature and a complete governmental shutdown now lets focus on why a complete governmental shutdown is bad, first it will cause Economic downfall/claps which fails the country than a state of nature is even worse there is no trade,law, or leadership which is going to cause a state of panic leading to rioting or gang takeovers/tribal agreements than it will cause other countries to attack the current checkpoint and than there government will run that section