Neuroscience and free will

I think we have causal explanation for the "why" of high-level events. We can explain pretty well why billiard balls bounce around the way they do. We just can't say, for example, why two identical fermions cannot occupy the same quantum state (Pauli). I'm fine if the "theory of free will" has lowest-level existants and attributes that cannot be explained further.

Why doesn't a billiard ball sometimes leap upward into outer space or change into a butterfly when struck by another billiard ball?

But then why can't you give a macroscopic description of how the agent makes the decision?

If has a description composing of parts it would mean either only the parts are free or the explanation fails to show freedom, and thus the presumed individual is not free.

Thus I still don't understand what you are looking for in the "how", as a mathematical/physics-based description isn't going to be possible since mathematics can only describe things as having some random variable(s) with probability distribution or a deterministic algorithm where the probability of the subsequent event is 1.

I mentioned Tallis' essays in my last post, if that is the kind of "how" that you are looking for given he discusses causal/possibility space within the context of human consciousness? It seems to me he addressed what is happening in consciousness when it interacts with the world, and how its aspect of intentionality allows the free willed individual a space to act in choosing alternatives...that seems like a "how" explanation at a macro-level?

We have laws that describe its path. I agree that we don't know what makes things happen consistently so that we can derive laws that work. But I'm not asking for an explanation of free will down at that level.

Why don't the laws change? As for levels, the level of causality is the correct level of explanation - the level of explaining how a circuit works where causation is assumed but unexplained is the wrong explanatory space. 

I'm perfectly happy if free will is axiomatic or built up out of lower-level axiomatic entities. Quarks are axiomatic (at least so far). But we can still describe how they operate.

if we can't explain the causal trajectory of quarks, we aren't really describing how they operate?

Wait, but how does God make free decisions?

In this metaphysics God is shown to be the continuing author of causality, a necessity rather than one more being. This is not to say the metaphysics is correct, but rather to show an example where if one can start with a brick hitting a window and show it needs such a God we can talk about how free will fits into that metaphysics.

Here is some discussion of the emergence of determinism:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.100...014-0008-4

Thanks, I'll make a new thread to keep things from getting overly long here. Though from the outset the author mentions "determinsitic law" which makes me wonder what would stop such a law or set of laws from changing...

You could certainly postulate that all the random events we see are actually free events produced by some Master Agent. But why would we postulate that without some evidence of the agent? What difference does it make if we postulate the agent?

I don't have any trouble with uncaused events, but perhaps that's because I haven't thought about it enough to get disturbed by the idea.

~~ Paul

Well there's either a top-down Agent or the random entities are themselves agents (or some kind of animism or tutelary spirits in between)

As for the difference, if one cannot distinguish between randomness and free will from the outside it suggests that trying to have external "how" explanations isn't going to ever yield a satisfying answer. Rather one has to ask what metaphysical picture can explain the seemingly random and if this provides a space for free will.

Additionally, it provides an explanation for events - given determinism is just randomness of a special kind - that is in accord with the Principle of Sufficient Reason. Or, at the least, gets us closer to such accordance if we can suss out appropriate metaphysical pictures...