In Kant’s view of morality, there are two important conditions of humanity that came into play: autonomy and rationality. A way to attack this assumption mentioned by is The Argument against Autonomy that was included in Shafer-Landau’s book. Essentially, it aims to prove that our choices are out of our control. While the argument provide a philosophical prospective, psychologist are also looking into the matter of free will and decision making. There was a proposal made by Dan Wegner and Thalia Wheatley about two decades ago. If proved, it would render free will an illusion as well as the Kantian morality. The proposal suggested that our brain might justify our choices after it was made and gave us the illusion of intention. A paper came out early this year by Adam Bear and Paul Bloom from Yale might gave some solid evidence for this hypothesis. They conducted experiment showing 5 white circles on the screen and one of them will turn red in seconds. The subjects were instructed to guess one that would turn red. The final result showed that the chances the subjects chose the right circle was about 30%, which is much higher than the probability. It should be noted that this is a very simple decision making process and might not illustrate what happens in more complicated decision making. Moreover, even the 30% result is statistically significant, it also shows that choices could be illusions at times, but not always (in that case the subjects would “guess” the right circles all the time). Still, personally speaking, scientific discovery like this would make me leaning towards nihilism.
Reference: Bear, A. (2016). What Neuroscience Says about Free Will. Scientific American Blog Network. Retrieved 15 July 2016, from http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/mind-guest-blog/what-neuroscience-says-about-free-will/