MARC Record from harvard_bibliographic_metadata

LEADER: 03412cam a2200421 i 4500
001 014142551-2
005 20141003185228.0
008 131129t20142014mau b 001 0 eng
010 $a 2013028479
016 7 $a016588629$2Uk
020 $a9780262525794 (pbk. : alk. paper)
020 $a0262525798 (pbk. : alk. paper)
024 8 $a40023414014
035 $a(PromptCat)99959571041
035 0 $aocn861323063
040 $aDLC$beng$erda$cDLC$dYDX$dYDXCP$dBTCTA$dBDX$dCDX$dOCLCO$dCHVBK$dYUS$dUKMGB$dHF9$dYHM$dOCLCF
042 $apcc
050 00 $aBJ1460$b.B35 2014
082 00 $a123/.5$223
100 1 $aBalaguer, Mark.
245 10 $aFree will /$cMark Balaguer.
264 1 $aCambridge, Massachusetts :$bThe MIT Press,$c[2014]
264 4 $c©2014
300 $a139 pages ;$c18 cm.
336 $atext$btxt$2rdacontent
337 $aunmediated$bn$2rdamedia
338 $avolume$bnc$2rdacarrier
490 1 $aMIT Press essential knowledge series
504 $aIncludes bibliographical references (page135) and index.
505 0 $aIntroduction-- The case against free will -- Can religion save free will? -- Can philosophy save free will? -- What is free will, anyway? -- Can we block the random -or-predetermined argument against free will? -- Can we block the scientific argument against free will? -- Conclusion
520 $aIn our daily life, it really "seems" as though we have free will, that what we do from moment to moment is determined by conscious decisions that we freely make. You get up from the couch, you go for a walk, you eat chocolate ice cream. It seems that we're in control of actions like these; if we are, then we have free will. But in recent years, some have argued that free will is an illusion. The neuroscientist (and best-selling author) Sam Harris and the late Harvard psychologist Daniel Wegner, for example, claim that certain scientific findings disprove free will. In this engaging and accessible volume in the Essential Knowledge series, the philosopher Mark Balaguer examines the various arguments and experiments that have been cited to support the claim that human beings don't have free will. He finds them to be overstated and misguided. Balaguer discusses determinism, the view that every physical event is predetermined, or completely caused by prior events. He describes several philosophical and scientific arguments against free will, including one based on Benjamin Libet's famous neuroscientific experiments, which allegedly show that our conscious decisions are caused by neural events that occur before we choose. He considers various religious and philosophical views, including the philosophical pro-free-will view known as compatibilism. Balaguer concludes that the anti-free-will arguments put forward by philosophers, psychologists, and neuroscientists simply don't work. They don't provide any good reason to doubt the existence of free will. But, he cautions, this doesn't necessarily mean that we have free will. The question of whether we have free will remains an open one; we simply don't know enough about the brain to answer it definitively. -- Provided by publisher.
650 0 $aFree will and determinism.
650 7 $aWillensfreiheit.$2gnd
650 7 $aFree will and determinism.$2fast$0(OCoLC)fst00933968
830 0 $aMIT Press essential knowledge series.
899 $a415_565536
988 $a20140819
906 $0DLC