Chapter 62
Questioning Our Free Will
The core premise of this book is that,
despite our Human Nature shortcomings, we can, to a large degree, choose to
overcome, or at the very least offset our deficiencies, amplify our Human
Nature strengths, and discover new, more survivable behaviors. Achieving all
this presupposes a large degree of free will. The question of free will has
occupied philosophers, scientists, and theologians for centuries. At stake is
whether human beings are truly the authors of their actions, or whether all
choices are products of prior causes beyond our control. The following presents
arguments both for and against the existence of free will, before considering a
possible middle ground.
Arguments
For Free Will
1. Introspective Experience
Human beings experience themselves as
decision-makers. When choosing what to eat or which career to pursue, we feel
we are actively weighing options. William James, in The Principles of
Psychology (1890), argued that the phenomenological experience of choice is
a fundamental aspect of consciousness and cannot be ignored.
2. Moral Responsibility
The foundations of ethics and law rely
on the assumption of free will. If individuals could not choose differently,
concepts such as justice, praise, and blame would collapse. For society, belief
in free will is a pragmatic necessity. Immanuel Kant, in Groundwork of the
Metaphysics of Morals (1785), maintained that moral responsibility assumes
freedom; without it, morality is incoherent.
3. Quantum Indeterminacy
Physics suggests the universe is not
strictly deterministic. Quantum mechanics introduces indeterminacy at the
smallest scales. Some philosophers, such as Robert Kane (The Significance of
Free Will, 1996), argue that this leaves space for human choice not to be
entirely predetermined.
4. Neuroplasticity and Self-Change
Neuroscience has shown that the brain
is adaptable. Studies of neuroplasticity reveal that people can form new habits
and reshape behavior through deliberate effort. Such evidence of self-directed
change suggests humans can exert genuine agency.
Arguments
Against Free Will
1. Determinism of Cause and Effect
Every choice can be traced back to
prior causes: genetics, environment, upbringing, and brain states. Baruch
Spinoza (Ethics, 1677) argued that people believe themselves free only
because they are ignorant of the causes determining them.
2. Neuroscientific Evidence
Benjamin Libet’s famous experiments
(Libet, 1985) showed that brain activity (“readiness potentials”) occurs
milliseconds before individuals report making a conscious decision. More recent
work (Soon et al., Nature Neuroscience, 2008) extended this finding,
suggesting unconscious brain activity can predict choices seconds before
conscious awareness.
3. Unconscious Bias and Conditioning
Psychology demonstrates that much of
human behavior is shaped by unconscious influences: heuristics, biases, and
habits (Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow, 2011). We may feel we are
freely choosing, but decisions are often guided by forces outside conscious
control.
4. Randomness ≠ Freedom
Even if quantum mechanics introduces
randomness, randomness does not equal free will. A random event is merely
unpredictable, not a freely chosen action (Strawson, Freedom and Belief,
1986).
5. Illusion of Agency
Neuroscientist Sam Harris (Free Will,
2012) argues that free will is an illusion. We feel free because we cannot see
the hidden causes of our behavior. Like optical illusions, the sense of freedom
may be a trick of perception.
Middle
Ground: Compatibilism
Compatibilists such as David Hume (An Enquiry
Concerning Human Understanding, 1748) and Daniel Dennett (Freedom
Evolves, 2003) argue that free will can exist alongside determinism.
According to this view, actions are “free” if they stem from one’s own desires
and reasoning, even if those desires have prior causes. Choosing to read a book
without coercion is “free” in this sense, even if one’s love of reading has
roots in upbringing or biology.
Conclusion
The debate over free will remains
unresolved because it sits at the crossroads of subjective experience (the
feeling of choice) and objective science (the reality of causation). Arguments
in favor stress moral responsibility and lived experience, while arguments
against highlight determinism and unconscious influences. Compatibilism offers
a middle path, suggesting that freedom lies not in escaping causality, but in
acting in accordance with one’s own nature. Whether free will exists in an
ultimate sense, the belief in it continues to shape how we live, judge, and
find meaning in human life. For the sake of life changes you may make after
reading this book and taking the Self-Reflection exercises, let’s assume that
compatibilism is the answer to the question of free will. This particularly applies to our next subject - Cognitive Biases. We know their power over us. Let's see if we can exert degrees of control over them.