In a recent post at his site, Jerry Coyne writes:
But physics does not have to be complete for us to accept determinism on a macro level.
Clearly, Coyne believes that there is determinism at the macro-level, which I take to be the level of ordinary objects such as we use in our everyday lives. He is not alone in that belief in determinism. It is a view I often hear.
That view is false.
The evidence from physics is clear.
Perhaps the simplest evidence, is that of radioactive decay. This is known to be in accordance with the exponential probability distribution. And the memoryless nature of the exponential distribution pretty much rules out the possibility that decay is deterministic.
And then there is the strong evidence for quantum indeterminacy.
“But,” you say, “those are all examples of micro-level indeterminacy. They are not evidence of macro-level indeterminacy.”
Physicists carry out experiments that demonstrate quantum indeterminacy.
“But, again, those only show indeterminacy at the micro-level.”
There are published research papers about quantum indeterminacy.
“Again, these only show micro-level indeterminacy. They do not show macro-level indeterminacy.”
The important thing to note, here, is that a physics experiment is a macro-level event. The publication of a research paper is a macro-level event. Physics experiments that demonstrate quantum level indeterminacy do so by amplifying the quantum level events so that they cause macro-level effects. Those experiments themselves are examples of macro-level indeterminacy.