Newcomb's Paradox is a thought experiment in game theory involving two players, where one player predicts the other's choice between two boxes. Box A contains $100, while Box B contains $1,000 if the predictor anticipates the player will choose only Box B. If the player chooses both boxes, they receive $100 from Box A, but Box B will be empty if the predictor predicted this choice. The paradox raises questions about free will, as it suggests that if the predictor can accurately foresee choices, the player's decision may not be free. The discussion highlights that the paradox hinges on the belief in the predictor's accuracy. If the predictor is genuinely accurate, choosing both boxes seems illogical, while if the predictor is merely guessing, choosing both boxes is the better option. The debate centers on whether this paradox serves as evidence for or against free will, with some arguing that its existence actually supports the concept of free will.
