Free Will or Not - That is the (or a) question

[JBG]

Free will is a frequent topic of philosophical and religious discussion. Interestingly, many people who consider themselves "educated" or in the intelligentsia deny or minimize the existence of free will. Striking examples are Demian by Hermann Hesse, written in 1919 or thereabouts, and the more recent Gray Matters: A Biography of Brain Surgery by Theodore H. Schwartz, written in 2024. Both books, and similar discussions by "enlightened" spiritual leaders twist themselves with pretzel logic to avoid the obvious conclusion that many, if not all, human actions are decided by people themselves. This is an excerpt from Demain:

"What is all this about the will?" I asked. "On the one hand, you say our will isn't free. Then again you say we only need to concentrate our will firmly on some end in order to achieve it. It doesn't make sense. If I'm not master of my own will, then I'm in no position to direct it as I please."

He patted me on the back as he always did when he was pleased with me. "Good that you ask," he said, laughing. "You should always ask, always have doubts....But we, too, are confined to a relatively narrow compass which we cannot break out of. If I imagined that I wanted under all circumstances to get to the North Pole, to achieve it I would have to desire it strongly enough so that my whole was being ruled by it. Once that is the case, once you have tried something that you have been ordered to do from within yourself, then you'll be able to accomplish it, then you can harness your will to it like an obedient nag....
But at that time in the fall when I was resolved to move away from my seat in the front row, it wasn't difficult at all. Suddenly there was someone whose name preceded mine in the alphabet and who had been away sick until then and since someone had to make room for him it was me of course because my will was ready to seize the opportunity at once." "Yes," I said. "I too felt odd at that time. From the moment that we began to take an interest in each other you moved closer and closer to me. But how did that happen? You did not sit next to me right away, first you sat for a while in the bench in front of me. How did you manage to switch once more?

Only when I found myself sitting in front of you did I realize that my wish was only half fulfilled and that my sole aim was to sit next to you.”

These are two excerpts from the very current book about neurosurgery, Gray Matters:

That we then retroactively fabricate stories to justify our behaviors is also unnerving, since it means that we may be constantly fooling ourselves into believing that our behaviors are self-motivated and that we have free will. Yet this model of brain organization appears to be one of its most fundamental organizing principles. Having been raised in a psychoanalytic household, aware of the invisible powers of what Freud described as the unconscious mind, I am perhaps less shocked than most by all of this.....
These findings, together with Fried's (sic, probably was "Freud's"), demonstrate the existence of a network of modules consisting of the anterior cingulate, the SMA, and part of the parietal lobe that somehow act in unison to create not only the decision to act but also the sense that the action was intended in the first place. Just as brain stimulation in one location can create an overwhelming certainty that God exists, in another location it can create a false sense of free will.

Both Dr. Schwartz and Mr. Hesse are unwilling to follow Occam's Razor; that the most obvious solution is often correct. Even if, as Dr. Schwartz believes, the interaction of "a network of modules consisting of the anterior cingulate, the SMA, and part of the parietal lobe" are what directly cause a person to take action, I consider it most likely that the human decision-making drove the brain's activities rather than the other way around.
A liberal society cannot operate without the assumption of their being free will. People must be held accountable for, or given credit for their actions. The people who deny or minimize free will are often people who believe that "the devil made me do it" or, in more enlightened terms, everything is determined by genetics or at the very least upbringing. At the extreme, some don't believe that murderers belong in jail since, they believe, then had no ability to conform their actions to society.

I welcome other views.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Other. Individual free will (the ability to act independently) obviously exists, yet society (a group of other people) largely decides which (individual) actions are rewarded, ignored or punished.

 

[eman623]

If I did not have free will, how would I know?

 

[ataraxia]

Free will is a frequent topic of philosophical and religious discussion. Interestingly, many people who consider themselves "educated" or in the intelligentsia deny or minimize the existence of free will. Striking examples are Demian by Hermann Hesse, written in 1919 or thereabouts, and the more recent Gray Matters: A Biography of Brain Surgery by Theodore H. Schwartz, written in 2024. Both books, and similar discussions by "enlightened" spiritual leaders twist themselves with pretzel logic to avoid the obvious conclusion that many, if not all, human actions are decided by people themselves. This is an excerpt from Demain:
These are two excerpts from the very current book about neurosurgery, Gray Matters:

Both Dr. Schwartz and Mr. Hesse are unwilling to follow Occam's Razor; that the most obvious solution is often correct. Even if, as Dr. Schwartz believes, the interaction of "a network of modules consisting of the anterior cingulate, the SMA, and part of the parietal lobe" are what directly cause a person to take action, I consider it most likely that the human decision-making drove the brain's activities rather than the other way around.
A liberal society cannot operate without the assumption of their being free will. People must be held accountable for, or given credit for their actions. The people who deny or minimize free will are often people who believe that "the devil made me do it" or, in more enlightened terms, everything is determined by genetics or at the very least upbringing. At the extreme, some don't believe that murderers belong in jail since, they believe, then had no ability to conform their actions to society.

I welcome other views.

There is a difference between the facts if neuro-behavioral psychology and how we should run a civil society. The threat of punishment itself will act as a deterrent and cause people to behave in more socially desirable ways. But that in itself is also a powerful deterministic factor in behavior. It doesn’t disprove free will.

Most neuroscientists understand this inherent tension in their deterministic position. But that still doesn’t mean there is true free well. If that was the case, people would just behave randomly and unpredictably, which is not how the world works. In the real world, the more we know about someone’s genetics, childhood, education, nutrition, exposure to toxins, etc., etc… some more accurately we can predict how they will behave. There doesn’t seem to be any limit to how accurately we can predict someone’s behavior if we theoretically could know everything about them in advance.

 

[Gordy327]

If someone with a mental illness feels compelled to act a certain way because of said illness, did they actually choose to act? Do they really have free will?

 

[ataraxia]

If someone with a mental illness feels compelled to act a certain way because of said illness, did they actually choose to act? Do they really have free will?

Which one of us does not have at least some degree of some kind of mental illness or other?

 

[Gordy327]

Which one of us does not have at least some degree of some kind of mental illness or other?

That's for mental health professionals to diagnose. But if mental illness is influencing our actions or decisions, then technically we do not have free will.

 

[ataraxia]

That's for mental health professionals to diagnose. But if mental illness is influencing our actions or decisions, then technically we do not have free will.

Yes. But it's not even just mental illness. Slip someone some narcotics or other drugs, and their behavior will change. Subject a child to corporal punishment growing up, and it will have effects on their behavior. Keep them awake for 48 hours, and their behavior will change, Have them have the chromosomal abnormalities of Down's syndrome, and their behavior will be predictable, etc, etc.... And it's not that all these other things still leave room for free will. It's looking like once you account for all these things, there is no room left for free will. It's just an illusion, an epiphenomenon.

 

[Gordy327]

, there is no room left for free will. It's just an illusion, an epiphenomenon.

Exactly!

 

[ataraxia]

Exactly!

I was always looking for the answer to this question in philosophy books. But what finally clinched the answer for me was this book by a neuroscientist:

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

Free will is a frequent topic of philosophical and religious discussion. Interestingly, many people who consider themselves "educated" or in the intelligentsia deny or minimize the existence of free will. Striking examples are Demian by Hermann Hesse, written in 1919 or thereabouts, and the more recent Gray Matters: A Biography of Brain Surgery by Theodore H. Schwartz, written in 2024. Both books, and similar discussions by "enlightened" spiritual leaders twist themselves with pretzel logic to avoid the obvious conclusion that many, if not all, human actions are decided by people themselves. This is an excerpt from Demain:
These are two excerpts from the very current book about neurosurgery, Gray Matters:

Both Dr. Schwartz and Mr. Hesse are unwilling to follow Occam's Razor; that the most obvious solution is often correct. Even if, as Dr. Schwartz believes, the interaction of "a network of modules consisting of the anterior cingulate, the SMA, and part of the parietal lobe" are what directly cause a person to take action, I consider it most likely that the human decision-making drove the brain's activities rather than the other way around.
A liberal society cannot operate without the assumption of their being free will. People must be held accountable for, or given credit for their actions. The people who deny or minimize free will are often people who believe that "the devil made me do it" or, in more enlightened terms, everything is determined by genetics or at the very least upbringing. At the extreme, some don't believe that murderers belong in jail since, they believe, then had no ability to conform their actions to society.

I welcome other views.

Free will is a religious construct and meaningless.

 

[Gordy327]

I was always looking for the answer to this question in philosophy books. But what finally clinched the answer for me was this book by a neuroscientist:

I found a good explanation on the idea of free will as well.

 

[ataraxia]

I found a good explanation on the idea of free will as well.

Interesting. Thanks. Listening to it now. What is particularly interesting for me is the consequences of how this kind of thinking/paradigm can lead to more compassionate and moral societies.

 

[ataraxia]

I found a good explanation on the idea of free will as well.

I think phenomenon of free will is closely associated with the phenomenon of consciousness. Now as to WHY the phenomenon of consciousness arose out of the evolutionary process, I found this video interesting and insightful:



Now as to HOW consciousness works.... well now anyone figures that out probably will be looking at a Nobel prize.

 

[reinaert]

Show will. Not events interpreted as a consequence of will. Will on its own.

 

[ajn678]

Free will is a meme. We are programmed and act based on things outside of our control.

 

[Gordy327]

I think phenomenon of free will is closely associated with the phenomenon of consciousness. Now as to WHY the phenomenon of consciousness arose out of the evolutionary process, I found this video interesting and insightful:



Now as to HOW consciousness works.... well now anyone figures that out probably will be looking at a Nobel prize.

Consciousness is a matter of the brain, especilly it's neural complexity and connectiveness. It's like a computer. Just at the complexity surrounding AI. Imagine if AIs become even more complex. Then you might see true artificial sentience and intelligence, kind of like Cmdr Data from Star Trek: TNG.

 

[ataraxia]

Consciousness is a matter of the brain, especilly it's neural complexity and connectiveness. It's like a computer. Just at the complexity surrounding AI. Imagine if AIs become even more complex. Then you might see true artificial sentience and intelligence, kind of like Cmdr Data from Star Trek: TNG.

It's possible that intelligence/complexity and consciousness are somehow related. But even if they are, I don't think it will be anything more than just a tangential relationship at best. For example, you can have highly complex intelligent computers, like with modern AI, but which are still nothing more than just a bunch of wires and hardware- vs something like a rabbit, which is probably not THAT intelligent, but which undeniably has SOME kind of consciousness going on.

In fact, like it says in the video, whatever the mechanism of consciousness is, it probably exists on a spectrum. It's not an all-or-nothing affair. For example, I don't think jellyfish and sea anemones have ANY consciousness. They are just complex biochemical machines. But as you move from them to crabs and lobsters, insects, mice, and eventually to cats, dogs, horses, dolphins, chimps, and eventually, us humans, there is a progressive increase in that consciousness (BTW, I think this idea of consciousness and sentience has important implications in issues ranging from animal rights- like do you worry about them in termites just like you would with a dog or a horse, or do you treat animals with more sentience and ability to feel pain with more dignity- to issues of abortion- for example a fetus has no recordable brain activity until the 20-30th weeks of gestation, so until then, is it OK to see it as just a ball of non-sentient cells).

This whole mechanism of becoming "self-aware", "sentient", or "conscious" is probably happening by a different mechanism than just intelligence. If we ever figure out the mechanism of how it works, I would be surprised if the answer ever would come from computer science- but rather from neuroscience.

But hey, who knows? We might be surprised and it may come from a surprisingly different discipline yet.

 

[Daisy]

Which one of us does not have at least some degree of some kind of mental illness or other?

Ain't that the truth? Who can live in this world and NOT be mentally ill?

 

[Metanoia]

The more we deny free will the more likely we will embrace “the devil made me do it” defense…..soon we will not expect to not demand responsibility of anyone….

 

[Metanoia]

Judging the results of many elections I might start leaning to the power of the devil….

 

[Gordy327]

It's possible that intelligence/complexity and consciousness are somehow related. But even if they are, I don't think it will be anything more than just a tangential relationship at best. For example, you can have highly complex intelligent computers, like with modern AI, but which are still nothing more than just a bunch of wires and hardware- vs something like a rabbit, which is probably not THAT intelligent, but which undeniably has SOME kind of consciousness going on.

In fact, like it says in the video, whatever the mechanism of consciousness is, it probably exists on a spectrum. It's not an all-or-nothing affair. For example, I don't think jellyfish and sea anemones have ANY consciousness. They are just complex biochemical machines. But as you move from them to crabs and lobsters, insects, mice, and eventually to cats, dogs, horses, dolphins, chimps, and eventually, us humans, there is a progressive increase in that consciousness (BTW, I think this idea of consciousness and sentience has important implications in issues ranging from animal rights- like do you worry about them in termites just like you would with a dog or a horse, or do you treat animals with more sentience and ability to feel pain with more dignity- to issues of abortion- for example a fetus has no recordable brain activity until the 20-30th weeks of gestation, so until then, is it OK to see it as just a ball of non-sentient cells).

This whole mechanism of becoming "self-aware", "sentient", or "conscious" is probably happening by a different mechanism than just intelligence. If we ever figure out the mechanism of how it works, I would be surprised if the answer ever would come from computer science- but rather from neuroscience.

But hey, who knows? We might be surprised and it may come from a surprisingly different discipline yet.

That basically describes the brain. Neurons are essentially wires interconnecting with each other. The greater the connectivity, the more powerful and complex the "processor" becomes. A single neuron doesn't do much. But billions together can do quite a lot. Of course, that is an oversimplification. Still fascinating though.

 

[ataraxia]

That basically describes the brain. Neurons are essentially wires interconnecting with each other. The greater the connectivity, the more powerful and complex the "processor" becomes. A single neuron doesn't do much. But billions together can do quite a lot. Of course, that is an oversimplification. Still fascinating though.

Maybe. But I suspect there is something more going on. I can’t see any number of wires and transistors being hooked together that would make them anything more than just a bunch of wires and transistors.

There must be some special mechanism at play or special way that they’re connected so that they may not even need to be all that complex to generate consciousness. It’s more than just raw complexity and sheer number of connections. I am sure there is some special mechanism at play, and I look forward to it being eventually being figured out some day.

 

[ataraxia]

The more we deny free will the more likely we will embrace “the devil made me do it” defense…..soon we will not expect to not demand responsibility of anyone….

I think even the most diehard determinists will tell you that when it comes to legal and judicial matters, we still need to have the model of accountability. But that’s only because that model and its consequences are just one more determining factor in how people behave- not because people have free will.

But, we might be more open to investing in preventive early life intervention, for example, such as better public educayion education or upbringing, which may lead to fewer people committing crimes – rather than just leaving the social conditions that lead to a life of crime, and then putting that person away for life. It seems not only inhumane, but wasteful and hurtful to a society.

 

[Variant]

If I did not have free will, how would I know?

You wouldn't, it's probably impossible to eliminate the possibility of a fully deterministic system, or eliminate the possibility of freedom within the system.