Do the laws of physics allow for free will?
nytimes.comThe argument that determinism negates moral responsibility only holds under the assumption that one is only morally responsible for actions of free will. The recent tsunami in Japan did not have free will but most people would agree that it (rather than the negligence of a free-willed party) is responsible for thousands of deaths.
Do you think you should hold a person morally responsible for a terrible result they have no control over? For instance, if I shoved person A into person B and as a result person B fell onto the third rail of a commuter train, would you hold person A morally responsible?
A century of quantum physics and people are still talking about the deterministic universe. Old ideas die hard.
Not to say that quantum randomness really counts as "free will" either. I'm not exactly sure how you would define it.
The challenge with applying quantum physics at the level our actions take place is that the laws of classical physics rule. So does that randomness impact our actions in any way or are our actions deterministic for all intensive purposes?
Not always. Lasers, for example, are macroscopic objects, but depend on quantum effects. Same with geiger counters, solar panels, all sorts of modern technology. Listen to the clicks on a geiger counter, and the state of your brain at any given instant is non-deterministic.
Researchers keep finding more ways that life uses quantum physics, including photosynthesis, the avian compass, and (maybe) the sense of smell:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcXSpXyZVuY
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12827893
So it wouldn't be all that surprising if they find quantum tricks in the brain, too.
Aside from that, there's radioactivity in your body, including your brain. I saw a speculation once that radioactive decay sparks electrical signals in the brain, which the brain sometimes amplifies enough to change macroscopic behavior. If that's the case, that would prevent our actions from being deterministic.