[Dr. Keter]

Everything in nature follows a pattern, and reacts to various stimuli. Atoms consistently behave the same way in the same environment. Cells have a job and keep following their programming. Do we really choose our own decisions? Or is it just the feeling we get as we come to logical conclusions to problems that our brains solve?

[CRNpolyfluoric]

You are implying that atomic -> cellular -> tissue -> organism -> conscious behavior are all equivocal with your reasoning.  Even atomic-scale forces and processes are not fully characterized in the modern body of scientific knowledge, and we therefore cannot even begin to validate (or to be fair, invalidate) this statement.

Everything in nature follows a pattern, and reacts to various stimuli. Atoms consistently behave the same way in the same environment. Cells have a job and keep following their programming. Do we really choose our own decisions? Or is it just the feeling we get as we come to logical conclusions to problems that our brains solve?

I would attest that cells are not static robots but actually respond in incredible and nuanced complexity to the infinite possible stimuli they may encounter.  Many cell types can currently be induced to form other, sometimes radically diffferent, types of cells and tissues by very precisely controlled application of chemicals *even in vivo*.  If a cell's complexity is so extreme and it is the smallest unit of differentiation then by very basic logic we can infer that the organ that must regulate every single cell in the body is so complex that it would fail if it could not learn.
Consider the process of human child-rearing.  Although the actual age of adulthood is debatable, if we could agree that it is the age of physical maturity (say, 15 for our calculations)  with an average lifespan of 75yrs that we spend a full 20% of our lives before we are considered "able" to think as an adult and act with full competency.  This is even more striking when we consider that just a few hundred years ago lifespan was MUCH lower and humans spend relatively even more time just learning to be full-blown adults.
Neurology is making tremendous strides in this area  but for the time being consciousness is still a "black box".  Consider neural networks, currently a smoking hot topic in the HPC and machine-learning game.  By order of sophistication a single brain has more neural connections that even the most glorious exa-scale GPU-fed self-booting Xeon Phi setup money can buy.  Hilariously, nobody knows how these really work inside either.
I guess my answer is yes, we really make every decision at every moment of every day.

Cheers,
Poly

[Jiggly]

Really in depth answer by @CRNpolyfluoric!

If you were a kid and touched an open flame once, and it hurt, you'd not do it again because you knew it hurts, which is then a learned response. You could argue that it's a response to stimuli, which it also is, but it's retained data used to consider other decisions later on, like ensuring you don't accidentally cause fire when handling something flammable. In this instance there is no stimuli currently, but previous experience impacts your future actions. There are so many theories about free will and determinism that we could talk about this for days. I personally believe there are many factors than contribute to decision making (free will), some may be more deterministic than others.

[meow]

Nope. We are all machines of biology, our response to anything is hard-coded into our genes, brains, and influenced by our environment. This includes the decisions you make, what you say, what you do, etc. You may think you are consciously making decisions based on what you think is correct, however, this is pseudo-free will, and is not the same as causeless actions. Someone or something is always the cause of anything you do. Truths such as these are the reason why branches of science such as psychology exist; it is so easy to control and gain insight to the human mind because essentially, down to the genetic level, we are all the same and are influenced by the same things in the same ways. If free will existed then psychology would be just as counterproductive as metaphysics. Call me cynical, pessimistic, whatever you want. Whatever you would like to refer to me as will not dismiss the fact that free will doesn't exist. This post goes nicely with one post I've already made on another thread - https://sinister.li/Thread-Opinions-on-d...#pid736552

I would attest that cells are not static robots but actually respond in incredible and nuanced complexity to the infinite possible stimuli they may encounter.

You need to retake biology if that's what you think.

[Botanicals]

Well, it really depends on how you define 'free-will.' I do believe that we have free-will to make choices, but these choices and the definition of character are heavily influenced by the planets, stars, asteroids, etc. From a scientific perspective, you could argue that consciousness is the product of mechanisms and chemicals in the brain. However, it can also be argued that these functions do their tasks in such a precise and perfect way that true life with free choice can be conceived.

[PhargedPhreak]

Some pretty good posts here. You have the ability to choose that's for sure. But what is causing you to choose to e.g. hold your finger in the flame? Why do you make that particular choice. To me it's unknown. Maybe there's some kind of randomness at the root of decision making which cascades up into consciousness. I don't know if that counts as free will or not. But it *feels* like I have free will.

[sleaze]

not everything is based on logic through, have you ever done something blatantly dangerous or stupid just to see if you could make yourself do it?