weakness free will

•  lacks support from research in neuroscience, which suggests that decision-making may be biologically determined. 

  Evidence: Libet et al. (1983) conducted an experiment where participants were asked to flex their wrist at a time of their choosing, while their brain activity was recorded using EEG. Participants were also asked to report the exact moment they became aware of their decision to move. Libet found that the readiness potential (a pattern of brain activity associated with initiating movement) occurred approximately 500 milliseconds before the participants reported their conscious decision to act. 

  Explanation: This finding implies that the brain had already begun preparing for the action before the participant became consciously aware of their decision, suggesting that the decision was initiated unconsciously. This challenges the concept of free will by implying that what we perceive as conscious choices may simply
•  unrealistic amount of blame and moral responsibility on individuals for their behaviour. 

  Evidence: For instance, individuals with mental health conditions such as schizophrenia may struggle to control their thoughts and actions, regardless of their intentions or choices. 

  Explanation: If we assume that people always have free will, then we risk ignoring the significant influence of biological, environmental, and unconscious factors that may constrain behaviour. This is particularly problematic when dealing with criminal behaviour or mental illness, as it implies that individuals are always fully responsible for their actions. Such a perspective may lead to unfair treatment, stigmatisation, or neglect of necessary support and interventions. In contrast, deterministic explanations often provide a more compassionate and realistic framework by recognising that behaviour may not always be freely chosen.