Action and thinking of action---those are the exact words of Jan Cox. It is not easy to glimpse the reality of the relation that points to---the interaction of hormones and neurons. Neurons are programmed to say, hey, I'm in charge. That does not mean your brain cells have a clue---it simply means their job is to pipe up and declare, yes I planned that, yes sir, that was my deliberate decision.
The example of Wesley Autrey is just an obvious example of why the conscious deliberation that is feigned AFTER THE FACT is a useful (to ordinary progress) aspect of man's mentation. What would happen in a world where the reality of, "heck, not sure why I did that, it just happened." The law courts for one, would just come to a screeching halt if there was any large scale glimpse of this reality. Politicians could not be blamed for economic problems, (and what would we do then???). Literature and philosophy are all based on the unstated assumption that man is a conscious agent. Without this assumption any idea of personal reform or a search for motives is silly.
Actually though, history is meaningless withOUT the assumption that the body moves and then, the caboose, the mind, chatters. Why DID those Vikings in the first millenium decide to terrorize Europe. Did they set out with a plan, or did, on a large scale, a physcial population, get the urge to DO SOMETHING. Gotta move, gotta dance, gotta strut my stuff. Oh no, that did not come from the brain. Of course once the long ships got in the water, then mind came up with something for a reason.
Could this also be the case for the European crusades? What about the attack on New York City and Washington in 2001. Could it be that the reason there was no competent intelligence for the security agencies to collate before the attack was that the attack did not start as a deliberate action.
...Okay, well, just think that this scenario I am sketching "could" be a possibilty.