If you think you are, then you become that way; if you think you aren’t, then you become that way. The way is free will and according to recent experiments,[Link] if you think you have free will then you act as if you do and if you think you don’t have free will, then you act as if you don’t.
I have to admit that the distinctions here are less than clear and I don’t think it is just the journalism. In fact, the argument here seems to be contrary to fee will in that if you’re told something you act that way and that seems to imply something other than the freedom to determine yourself.
On the other hand, you can argue that being told you’re something and adopting that behavior is an indication of freedom to change, but it certainly doesn’t cast a very good light on whether your will is involved.
This is worse than an onion. Every layer you peel off leads to a new level of ambiguity. So do I drop the matter because I have decided it’s not a profitable approach to the question or because I am frustrated? AGain arguments for free will and determinism.
This begins to look like some sort of anti-observer phenomenon. If you don;t observe it then it is there but if you do observe it, it goes away upon being observed.