Further Thoughts on Counterfactuals, Compatibilism, Conceptual Mismatches, and Choices: Response to Commentaries

@article{Baumeister2011FurtherTO,
  title={Further Thoughts on Counterfactuals, Compatibilism, Conceptual Mismatches, and Choices: Response to Commentaries},
  author={Roy F. Baumeister and A. William Crescioni and Jessica L. Alquist},
  journal={Neuroethics},
  year={2011},
  volume={4},
  pages={31 - 34}
}
The grand question of whether people have free will turns out to be not one but several different questions. We have been challenged and excited to work on them, and we are honored to benefit from the commentaries by such distinguished thinkers as Mele, Holton, and Nahmias. In this brief article we say how we have benefited from their comments. 

References

SHOWING 1-7 OF 7 REFERENCES
Why ‘Willusionism’ Leads to ‘Bad Results’: Comments on Baumeister, Crescioni, and Alquist
Drawing on results discussed in the target article by Baumeister et al. (1), I argue that the claim that the modern mind sciences are discovering that free will is an illusion (“willusionism”) is
Surrounding Free Will: A Response to Baumeister, Crescioni, and Alquist
This contribution to a symposium on an article by Roy Baumeister, A. William Crescioni, and Jessica Alquist focuses on a tension between compatibilist and incompatibilist elements in that article. In
Do conscious thoughts cause behavior?
TLDR
The evidence for conscious causation of behavior is profound, extensive, adaptive, multifaceted, and empirically strong, however, conscious causation is often indirect and delayed, and it depends on interplay with unconscious processes.
Comments on 'Free will as advanced action control for human social life and culture' by Baumeister, Crescioni, and Alquist
  • Neuroethics
Do conscious thoughts cause behavior? Annual Review of Psychology
this issue). Why 'willusionism' leads to 'bad results': Comments on Baumeister
  • this issue). Why 'willusionism' leads to 'bad results': Comments on Baumeister