Abstract: Neuro-determinism views the brain and neural activities as the cause of individual mental nature, behavior, and sociality, denies human free will, and attempts to explain, predict, and control the human mind by observing and altering brain neural activity. Neuro-determinism has three core propositions. First, the cause of behavior is not consciousness, there is a neural activity prior to consciousness, which is the real cause of behavior, and free will is just an illusion. Second, the psychological and social attributes of human beings can be explained by finding the corresponding brain nerves and their structures, which are responsible for all our psychological, behavioral and social attributes. Third, the cause of psychological or mental abnormality lies in the abnormal structure and function of brain nerves. By questioning and disproving the rationality of these three propositions, one will see the logic fallacies of neurological determinism and its possible dangers.
However, the three connotations of neuro-determinism all have substantial logical errors. First, the experimental evidence of neurological determinism to deny free will not only has the methodological problems of experimental research, but also shows a narrow understanding of consciousness. The errors and omissions of the experimental argument by which neurological determinism negates free will reproduces the methodological dilemma of experimental research that “The researcher's observation and experimental design process itself determine its experimental results”. At the same time, consciousness is not the additional initiator of action intention. The reflection of the action intention is consciousness, and the action intention itself is also consciousness. You cannot take the reflection of action intention as the only consciousness and give up free will as an illusion because of its delay. Second, the neural components of consciousness cannot be equated with the causes of consciousness, and mirror neurons (systems) are not the “DNA” of psychology. The belief that neurons in the brain have innate roles and functions and are the cause of individual psychological, behavioral, and social attributes, which clearly overlooks three facts. The specificity of human brain neuron function is based on more primitive and lower order function. Function is innate, but the content of function is environmental and cultural. The plasticity of neurons and the nervous system determines that learning and experience can affect the function and structure of the brain and determines the extent to which the acquired individual's abilities are developed and realized. At last, the biological view of healing the mind by repairing the brain ignores that the brain is a meaning processing system that integrates the information from the internal and external world. Repairing the brain cannot heal the mind.
Accepting neuro-determinism will lead to a series of practical dangers. Denying free will may hinder humanity's comprehensive understanding of its own mental issues, erode human subjectivity, and bring ethical issues of technological innovation. Considering mirror neurons (systems) as the neural basis of human psychological behavior and social attributes, and thus endowing them with excessive value, will lead to the revival of the “brain small person hypothesis”, while neglecting to explore the species and individual developmental characteristics of neural mechanisms. If a person accepts that he does not have free will, he is more likely to become an idle person, reducing prosocial behavior. The comprehensive infiltration of neuro-determinism into various fields will bring ethical controversies such as subjectivity and the right to life. It is necessary to reflect on the dangers posed by new technological advances.
In summary, the following theoretical revisions have been made to neuro-determinism. From the perspective of the relationship between the brain and consciousness, free will is the result of the development of the brain as a biological organization. A reasonable and more constructive way to ask questions should be how the brain, as a biological organization, operates to create consciousness and free will in individuals who possess it. Psychological and behavioral symptoms are the result of processing and resolving pathological conflicts, and they must be resolved by the same psychological processing mechanism. Compared to neuro-determinism, a stance of compatibility theory is more appropriate, that is, determinism and libertarianism are not either here or there, and in the material world of the evolved biological brain, both views can exist simultaneously.

Key words: neuro-determinism, consciousness, free will

摘要： 神经决定论将脑和神经活动看作个体心理、行为和社会性的原因,否定人的自由意志,力图通过观察、改变脑神经活动来解释、预测和控制人的心智。然而,神经决定论借以否定自由意志的论据既有实验研究的方法论问题,又表现出对意识的狭隘理解。此外,意识的神经相关物不能等同于意识的原因,修复脑并不能治愈心灵。否定自由意志将阻碍人类对自身心智问题的全面理解、使人的主体性被消解,并带来技术革新的伦理问题。在修正心脑关系后,一种相容论的立场更具适恰性,即物理决定论和自由意志论并不是非此即彼的,更为合理的、更具建设性的提问方式应该是脑是如何活动而使拥有它的个体产生了意识并具有了自由意志。

关键词: 神经决定论, 意识, 自由意志