What does “free will” mean?

Abstract

Robert Sapolsky argues that free will requires complete independence from uncontrollable influences. We claim this criterion is overly demanding and misaligned with ordinary understandings of free will. To assess folk intuitions, we presented 197 American participants with five scenarios in which a person's behavior was shaped by uncontrollable factors. In four cases—preferences, genetic traits, brain function, and advertising—most participants judged the person to possess free will. A fifth scenario involving a compliance drug served as a control; here, most participants denied free will. These findings suggest that laypeople consider free will compatible with certain external influences. Thus, Sapolsky's conception diverges from common usage. While his strict definition may rule out free will, our results support the viability of a more moderate and widely endorsed conception. Any attempt to refute free will must first demonstrate that the definition used captures its common meaning