In the previous post you asserted that the living entity was in some way an author in much of the universal script the entity must follow.
No, I didn't. All of that is your language, which I tried to go along with because one must start somewhere.
"Script" is proving to be a terminally misleading analogy, and I'm giving up on it.
Restart: There is no script.
Since the self is composed of, and exists in the constituents of nonself universe,
Nope. All of its constituents belong to the "self" part of the universe, by definition of "constituent".
But those living entities and their internal workings are compositions of the same universal elements that exists in the nonliving entities
Not "universal" - particular. So?
The collisions of material bodies(billiards for example)will produce essentially invariant trajectories based on like material, spacial and energy characteristics of the event. The same reasoning can theoretically be applied to any kind of behavioral event, including those involving living entities.
1) Theoretically, one cannot predict such "trajectories" beyond certain limits. For example, fifth degree equations - often necessary - cannot in general be solved exactly. Also significant: in a situation so populated with nonlinear feedback loops and combinatorial interactions chaos theory proves that quantum effects will be amplified to observable, macroscopic effects within seconds or minutes - not even billiard balls in the simplest of circumstances can be assigned "invariant trajectories", regardless of the completeness of information possessed at any given moment.
2) When applied to living entities, what related reasoning produces is quite different from the "trajectories" of Newtonian reductive oversimplification. It has feedback loops at two or even three higher logical levels. It reacts to modeled futures - events that have not and may never have happened - for example. No billiard ball or anything analogous can do that.
3) "Invariant" has yet to be explained.What is that word doing there?
4) "Billiard balls", meanwhile, are abstracted arrangements of quarks, which are not material entities and have entirely different properties - they do not "collide", for example. Why did you choose to apply your reasoning to that higher or more encompassing level of organization and abstraction?
Suddenly, people’s choices—even a basic finger tap—appeared to be determined by something outside of their own perceived volition."
That does not follow from the research. The perception of the volition lags the event of volition as well - that does not render the volition fictional or irrelevant. The research has discovered something about one's perception of other mental events - not the events themselves.
How many free wills can dance on the head of a pin?
None.
The mechanisms and substrates of the human will occupy a volume of a thousand cubic centimeters or so, and weigh between two and three pounds. That is considerably larger than most pinheads.
