Sean Carroll

Footnote, by the way, they do not, because there is quantum mechanics.

People want to forget that, but okay, I'm going to put it there.

That's me, Sean, talking.

Now we go back to Ian.

How can it logically follow that my choices are not solely determined by the underlying physics?

In other words, if fundamental physics equals deterministic and my brain equals fundamental physics, how can we get my brain is not deterministic?

And then Mike Cohen says, enjoyed the Christian list conversation very much.

I can't wholly internalize his and your view of the possibility of determinism there but not here because it feels to me as though different levels of reality blend continuously into each other with no clear dividing line between a level whose past and future is determined by laws and a juxtaposed level of thought that is agentive.

Therefore, the concept of different but supportive levels that do not share determinacy seems off.

However, this is my lived experience of free will.

I have it, and since levels of determinism probably cannot be resolved, I'm happy to truck along my agentive road.

In physics and philosophy, there are many mansions.

I will trouble myself no more about free will.

That's probably a good attitude that you have there, Mike.

Okay.

So the general principle of all these, the general query underlying all these questions is I hear what you're saying about levels and so forth.

And I kind of want to get on the train that says that at higher levels, there might be free will.

Even at lower levels, we're just obeying the laws of physics.

But I am reluctant to see how you can have such an ontological difference between

between the lower level and the higher level.