That's the question, isn't it? I didn't say I could show determinism is patently false. I just said I can show you that determinism isn't patently true, either. This is exactly what I mean. Why (and how) do we force chemical B over chemical A? More information on this sort of question is required before we can conclude anything about determinism.
True, we can't conclude anything with 100% certainty, but my own logic points me to consider determinism as my default until something comes along and evidences something else.
Only common knowledge of the most basic of brain-scans are required. The ones where the brain has a stable state, and then the patient can say they are thinking of something and certain areas of the brain light up. Then they can say they're thinking of something else, and different areas of the brain light up again. And at any time the patient says they aren't thinking of anything imparticular, the brain's lights return to the original stable state. This shows that (somehow, someway) we are capable of consciously controlling when distinct areas of our brains activate and deactivate with our will alone.
This shows correlation. When we think of one thing, one area lights up and when we think of something else, some other place lights up. This doesn't, in and of itself, point to one side or the other because we don't know what is the cause behind those area lighting up. The very fact that we expect a cause, though, seems to indicate that our brains are wired to think in deterministic ways. We don't ever believe things happen without a cause, until we get down to quantum mechanics, and the very fact that QM seems so counterintuitive is another indicator that we're wired to see things deterministically. When we're talking about our brains themselves, it seems a small leap to consider it's possible that our brains see things deterministically because our brain itslef is deterministic, but I concede this is by no means a slam-dunk argument.
As I said before, more information is required before a conclusion can be validated.
Agreed. And even if things are determinisitic, I consider free will to be, at least, an necessary illusion, so for the most part, I act as though I have it and don't worry too much about it.
™ Version 4.2
