That scenario would support free will. But I don't see the scenario ever taking place.

How so, it happens all the time. People with the ability to do right, but chose to do wrong.

I know I do it daily.

EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect (it seems I'm not alone)

2006 Monaco GP Qualifying. I still don't know what the hell was Schumacher thinking.

Like what?

I don't think I've ever done something without a reason. They may not have always been good reasons...but I thought they were at the time.

Here, just looked it up.

"To sum it up: Every single decision you make is entirely based on your personal preference, which you can't overlook. Humans will always seek for the greatest possible amount of profit through their actions, and whatever that profit consists of is based on that very same personal preference."

While I think your post is very interesting, I think you are discounting the critical roll of Altruism in human society.

If we all just thought and acted for ourselves, we would still be hanging in trees killing each other over food.  There would be no charity, no medicine, no science, little need for language, and (sigh) NO computer games, graphics or consoles.

In life the self centered individual seems to be self limiting on how far they can advance. As the lead of a wolf pack, will get challenged regularly and eventually lose.

In recent studies scientist have been looking at what separates us from the rest of the animals and altruism is very rare in non-domestic or human influenced animals.  The one exception might be ants – they are the dominate species on the planet is because of their society.  A single ant can not do much on their own, but they work together and are amazing.  (You could also argue they don’t have free will as so behavior is chemical and pheromones.)

Anyway, not sure if you’re a psychologist or social psychologist, but it might be your calling.

Haha, no. I'm just a simple free-thinker :P Only gone through one year of basic psychology and six months of philosophy education.

Ahem, the thing is though that by cooperating and building societies just like ants, we do achieve what we think would be maximum profit. I'm was never saying that man is selfish, because that does rarely pay off.

Good point, this could be a good invalidation. But I'm not familiar with the Bystander effect at all, so I won't make any statements about it just yet. Though I will say that after skimming through the wikipedia page, it gives a few explanations for why people ignore others, so there may still be legitimate reasons for the Bystander effect as well. But I'll have to read more up on it before i can feel confident in my opinion on it.

- - 

But seriously, let's be honest, THE1. You're claim - Everyone does something for a reason - cannot be justified. The reason is because it cannot be falsified. It cannot be proven wrong, even in theory. The even idea of your  claimcannot be proven wrong. Whenever ANYONE does ANYTHING, you can ALWAYS give some random reason for why they did it - BUT it is not possible to test, and therefore confirm, if those reasons are accurate. We have no way of knowing if those reasons are actually correct

For example, let's say Tommy was walking down the street and stopped to look at a bug. You could explain it by saying Johny stopped because the bug fascinated him and caught his attention. But let's say Johny didn't stop to look at the bug. You could explain it by saying Johny doesn't care about bugs because of the way he was raised. But let's say Johny stopped, but didn't look at the air. You could explain it by saying Johny felt a stiffness and his leg and need to stop to relieve the pain. But let's say Johny stopped and started dancing randomly. You could explain it by saying Johny suddenly felt a tingling sensation in his body which caused a mixture of chemicals in his brain to cause his body to want to dance. But let's say Johny ran in front of a truck and commited suicide. You could explain it by saying Johny had thouroughly considered the potential future of his life and had made the valid conclusion that his life was worthless. But let's say Johny started walking very slowly. You could explain by just saying "Johny felt like walking slow"

The problem is none of these explanations can be tested. As such, we don't know if they are actually true or not. I could pull some random explanation out of my ass everytime and you wouldn't be able to prove me wrong. It is impossible to prove anything if it cannot be tested. I'm pretty sure you've used that argument against religion before too.

You are fundamentally wrong on all accounts.

Addiction is not a disease no matter what people would like to believe to divert blame. Addicts become addicts through a  series of bad decisions. I've never had more than a sip of alcohol at any given time. I've never taken a drug of any kind outside of medication. I've never smoked a cigarette. I'm not even addicted to coffee like so many of my coworkers.

For alcohol I made a choice long ago. It was a personal choice, not based on religion or a family tragedy or anything like that. When I was 18 or 19 I noticed that the world would be a better place if people had never decided to alter their state of mind with drugs like alcohol or even the seemingly benign marijuana. Because I believe this,  I decided  it would be hypocrite of me to enjoy alcohol, even in moderation, while telling others they are abusing it. I took control. Why would I give my control to a glass of booze?  People think it's fun and it feels good, but it causes so much direct and indirect suffering. I find it disturbing that so many people think life would be bland without a bottle.

Addicts traded their control for a temporary high. They are not powerless, they just relinquished their power to a mindless drug. The fact that they can regain that power through an anti-addiction program is proof that we do have control over our lives even when it seems like we don't. 12-Step programs actually force people to take responsibility for their addiction. You are misunderstanding the intent of the "powerless" statement. It is not saying that we are powerless, it is saying that addicts have lost their power. The key to a 12-Step program is taking control back.

You say the answer is letting go of control. That is completely wrong. That's the kind of thing a drug user would say to justify their drug use. I say we should take more responsibility and exercise more direct control. We should plan ahead more and leave less to chance. We can't control everything, but would should never let go of that which we can control. That's the difference between humans and animals. We can choose to control what we can. Animals let go and live without any control.

@kain_kusanagi 

Where did i say it was a disease? 

2. Came to believe that a Power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.

3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him

6. Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.

7. Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings.

Does that sound like taking back control? Why are you pretending you know what you're talking about?