Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Neuroscience vs philosophy: Taking aim at free will

Scientists think they can prove that free will is an illusion. Philosophers are urging them to think again.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type



Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout


  1. Soon, C. S., Brass, M., Heinze, H.-J. & Haynes, J.-D. Nature Neurosci. 11, 543-545 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Libet, B., Gleason, C. A., Wright, E. W. & Pearl, D. K. Brain 106, 623-642 (1983).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bode, S. et al. PLoS ONE 6, e21612 (2011).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Fried, I., Mukamel, R. & Kreiman, G. Neuron 69, 548-562 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Vohs, K. D. & Schooler, J. W. Psychol. Sci. 19, 49-54 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


Additional information

Kerri Smith is editor of the Nature Podcast, and is based in London.

Related links

Related links

Related external links

Big questions in free will

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Smith, K. Neuroscience vs philosophy: Taking aim at free will. Nature 477, 23–25 (2011).

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing