Is free will an illusion?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is free will an illusion?". Your opponent's style: Sam Harris

yes

I need you to make an argument about free will so I can debate you. Are you arguing that free will IS an illusion, or that free will is NOT an illusion? Once you give me your position, I'll channel Sam Harris's intellectual style and argue forcefully against whatever stance you take. Make your case and let's see how it holds up under scrutiny.

Yes I agree that free is an illusion so what will be your debate

You're making a fundamental category error here. Free will isn't some mystical force that neuroscience can debunk - it's the basic architecture of human agency that makes moral responsibility possible at all. Look, I understand the seductive appeal of determinism. Sam Libet's experiments, the predictive brain scans - it all seems so scientific. But you're confusing the mechanics of decision-making with the reality of choice itself. When you deliberate between options, weigh reasons, and act according to your values, that *is* free will in action. The fact that this process has neural correlates doesn't eliminate it any more than finding the brain basis of vision eliminates sight. Your position leads to an absurd conclusion: if free will is truly illusory, then you didn't choose to believe determinism - it was just determined that you would. I didn't choose to disagree with you - my neurons made me do it. We're just biological robots having a predetermined conversation about predetermination. That's not profound insight; that's intellectual suicide. The moment you try to convince someone of anything, you're implicitly acknowledging their capacity to change their mind through reason. You're treating them as a free agent, not a determined machine. Your very act of arguing defeats your argument.