>>17832628>> You have to make [your will] free>And how do (you) do that? By breaking free from sin and letting your nature make the picks.
>>no no no I'm influenced by my life experiencesI don't know who you're quoting
>>17833071All the way down where? I'm just saying we formulated a hypothesis and it turned out to be wrong. How stuff actually works is of little importance to me given that our cognitive machinery isn't designed to give us an accurate picture of what "stuff" surrounds us to begin with.
>>17833085That entirely depends on how technical or intuitive you're trying to be. If you're trying to be completely technical, then even a single quantum uncertainty related event in the brain would make it non-deterministic and there are no good reasons to exclude those from likely happening in channel functions and various transmitter binding events. If you're trying to be more intuitive, as in that things can be roughly simplified into determinism, then you have ceded the discussion since it is much more intuitive and straightforward to simplify things into non-determinism.
Your position is only feasible if we take a cocktail shaker and manage to mix technical POV and intuitive POV ratios just right for one particular taste.