Free: Why Science Hasn't Disproved Free Will

In a shift from his previous works on the topic, Mele (A Dialogue on Free Will and Science) employs plain English in order to achieve his aim of reaching a wider audience. To this end, Mele puts us through the paces of the science that allegedly disproves free will and then succinctly points out the logical fallacies and tacit conceits assumed by the work of noted neuroscientists such as Benjamin Libet and Elsa Youngsteadt, as well as social scientists such as Daniel Wegner and Philip Zimbardo. Although Mele's criticism of the neuroscience is thoroughly convincing, on tougher cases such as Zimbardo's infamous Stanford prison experiment, bystander studies, or the Kitty Genovese case, he appeals to optimism rather than evidence. To claim, as this book does, that with the knowledge of these experiments individuals will now act differently seems contrived and unscientific. This, in turn, points to the book's ostensible failure to reference other thinkers on the free will side of the debate. Instead, Mele is mostly self-referential, recommending his own works as further reading. Nevertheless, the book does provide resources for readers to stay abreast of the most relevant scientific research; a noteworthy achievement for a subject often shrouded in jargon and obscurity. (Oct.)