Focusing on actual processes in the brain may be a more objective discussion than discussing "free will". For example, is the human brain driven by reinforcemen

Focusing on actual processes in the brain may be a more objective discussion than discussing "free will". For example, is the human brain driven by reinforcement learning? is dopamine part of the reward loop? how does curiosity fit in? Are there tipping point effects in neural networks? What about noise, or even quantum effects if you were trying to model and predict an outcome? Regardless of one's position, that's an objective discussion with questions that can be tested, with useful results that could help develop a general AI. Contrast that with a discussion about "free will", a suitcase word with numerous polarizing definitions. It's like walking into a minefield of bias and enmity. And frankly just as much strident opinion from "rationalists" as from the religious. And I ask, where is that going? What's the result such discussion is driving towards? Is the discussion really analyzing a real physical process in the brain or is this a values discussion masquerading as logic?