As humans can do a wide variety of activities doesn’t that prove we have free will?

Answer Podcast

So, as we human beings can do a wide variety of activities, doesn’t that prove that we have brain? Yes, of course. We can do, like when a cat sees a mouse, the cat cannot think. So, there is impulse and there is intelligence.
The animals also have intelligence. But their intelligence is used to serve the impulse. There is a deer over there, there is a lion, I want to catch it, but the wind is blowing like this.
If I go like this, it will catch the snake. So, I will go around and pounce on the deer. So, intelligence is there, but the intelligence is used in the service of the impulse.
We humans, we also have impulses. But we can use our intelligence to check our impulse. So, we definitely have free will.
And by that free will, we can do a wide variety of activities. So, this, so from an observed perspective, it is true that we have free will. But what I was saying is, this is not explainable, the existence of free will, which is a fact of life, is not explainable within the scientistic world view.
The scientistic world view holds that we are simply impulse driven creatures. So, therefore, it is the fact that we have, we can do a variety of activities, that itself indicates we have free will. And this, how we are able to do activities, which are non-impulsive, or which are even counter-impulsive, survival of the fittest is the driving principle according to the theory of evolution.
It is true at one level, but it is not too exhaustive. It is true at the physical level. If there is some food and I am hungry, I want to pounce on the food and eat it.
That is the impulse. But we have a high excitement. We have intelligence, we have conscience.
Although I may be very hungry, so I see others also do not have food. And although it is limited, I may divide the food. Sometimes I may give my share to someone else.
Now, when a person is drowning, at that time, now somebody may jump into the river to save that person. Now they are risking their life. But they risk their life to save the person.
And then what do we see over there? Actually, this is not survival of the fittest. This is sacrifice by the fittest for the survival of the unfit. And we do not think this is, oh, he was not stupid.
No, if somebody risks their life, they are considered heroes. We consider it an ennobling feature for human beings. So we, the very fact that we can do activities of non-impulsive, even counter-impulsive, that indicates that we are more than programmed machines.
That we have a side of us which can resist the programming of the machines