The question of whether or not people can choose their thoughts and actions has been a topic that many great thinkers throughout history have pondered. Yet, despite countless arguments for and against, no one has been able to prove whether free will exists or not. Free will is the ability to make a choice not determined by external stimuli. The opposite of free will is determinism. Hard determinists argue that there is no such thing as free will; people do not have the ability to choose freely, undetermined by external stimuli. Yet, despite many compelling arguments in support of this thesis, hard determinism ignores the unique quality of humanity. Humanity has the ability to think and reason, which ultimately gives them the unique attribute of agent-causality. Hard determinism holds that all events are caused. Hard determinists define human thoughts and actions as events. If human thoughts and actions are events, then they must be caused. If every human thought and action were caused, then humans would not have the ability to choose their thoughts and actions because they depend entirely on prior causes. If this is the case, there can be no such thing as free will. Hard determinists further argue that if there is no such thing as free will, then there can be no such thing as moral responsibility, because if a man or woman cannot choose to do anything other than what they have done, there is no possibility that no responsibility can fall on them for their thoughts or actions. Their actions were simply caused by something else, which in turn was caused by something else, and so on. Although hard determinists provide a valid argument, it is ultimately false. Looking at their first argument, it is easy to see how they believe the premise to be true. After all, anyway... middle of paper... the hotdog is away, which still leaves a 1% chance to change, to make another decision. It may be caused by randomness, but that does not mean that the decision made is random. In reality, that small random percentage gives him the chance to change his decision. In conclusion, free will is not only possible, but quite probable, and, if free will exists, then obviously moral responsibility exists. Hard determinists have several valid arguments to make their case, but the best of them, the random probability argument, cannot be proven. Humanity's understanding of physics is not advanced enough to prove their claim true. Perhaps at some point this will change, but for now it is not a good enough argument to disprove the possibility of free will, while the arguments for free will mentioned above hold that the concept of free will is quite probable.