# data[].attributes.body
Sam Harris provides the evidence of the unconscious decision to stop reading a magazine once you are bored. It is shown in studies that your brain decides shortly prior to stop reading before you physically put down the magazine yourself. The least convincing evidence Harris displayed is the criminal who decided to rape a woman after beuing

# data[].attributes.body
Harris uses a story about the criminals Hayes and Komisarjevsky, which questions whether or not they should be convicted for the rape and murder of a family. He also shares their backstories describing how they were raped as children and also how they had brain tumors that changed how they acted once removed. These past experiences make the fate of these criminals harder to decide. Even small examples such as his description of coffee and tea show how even things that seem like you have free will are still influenced by your past experiences.

# data[].attributes.body
Sam Harris provides evidence to support

# data[].attributes.body
Sam Harris provides a mixture of scientific evidence and personal experience to support his perspective. Harris's presentation of neurology scientifically proves to his audience that a person's movement can be distinguished prior to the conscious mind. His least convincing arguments relate to his bias

# data[].attributes.body
The evidence to support Sam Harris's positions is a story such as a person with a brain tumor having an impact on their motor skills and perspective of what is moral and immoral. It is evident that this is

# data[].attributes.body
Harris' most convincing argument regarding his view that free will is an illusion is in his explanation of Benjamin Libet's experiment using the EEG proving that the brain makes decisions before we are even cognizant of them. Harris' weakest argument is his unsubstantial explanation of his morning routine of drinking coffee or tea. This argument involves no dilberation or real consequences people can form opinions off of.

# data[].attributes.body
Sam Harris asserts that, "We are conscious of only a tiny fraction of the information that our brains process in each moment. Although we continually notice changes in our experience...by merely glancing at your face or listening to your tone of voice others are more often aware of your state of mind and motivations that you are." This supports the idea that we are not actually aware of our actions. "Direct readings from the cortex showed that the activity of merely 256 neurons was sufficient to predict with 80% accuracy a person's decision to move 700 milliseconds before he became aware of it"

# data[].attributes.body
Sam Harris supports his argument by providing scientific research on peoples thought process. The study on the mental states present before we make a decision is the most convincing evidence because, it isn't a theory its structured evidence. Whereas the robbers could have been lying.

# data[].attributes.body
"Every choice we make is a result of preceding causes" (par.2). Harris's most convincing evidence is, when he builds his ethos by citing a respected neuroscientist that supports his claim.

# data[].attributes.body
Harris uses the horrible story about the criminals and their actions as an example that we do not have free will. Komisarjevsky as an example, was "triggered" after hearing the screams of his victim (Harris 2). The screams initiated a memory from his past which led him to have such violent behavior. This supports Harris position on free will by showing that past traumas and experiences can lead us to make choices we would not have otherwise made. Another piece of convincing evidence is the fault of the tumor that dictated a person's way of living.