The notion of free will sits right at the centre of everything we consider civilized and human, but it probably doesn't exist in the sense that it is commonly understood.
If one takes a scientific view of the universe of particles and waves whizzing around and banging off of one another according to fixed physical laws, then there is no obvious place for free choice. One could posit souls that exist apart from those laws (but somehow interact with them - don't go there) but that is problematic too. If one imagines presenting a soul with a particular choice then that soul would either make a fixed choice (what then of free will?) or it would make a choice at random (not consonant with any idea of free will that anyone is really happy with).
On top of this, it is not clear where decisions and choices come from. Anyone who has reflected deeply on their own thought processes is aware that words, sentences, actions, thoughts and so on, come from some unknowable place within. They just appear. If there is free will, it does not reside within consciousness, because one can be conscious of automatic reactions to situations. One could, I suppose, try to split decisions into conscious and unconscious, or simple (automatic requiring little or no reflection) and complex (requiring much reflection), but how does one draw the line? Are some choices free and others predetermined? Even complex questions requiring reflection can only be tracked back so far before they too disappear into the dark hole of the head.
What is unarguable is that we have something that feels like free will. And, like most feelings, it is impossible to shake: there is some I that is responsible for the things that I do.
One thing that science clearly demonstrates is that, although it is clearly an important part of our evolved toolkit for dealing with life, common sense can often go badly wrong. The evidence from our senses can mislead. Sometimes what is obvious is not true. This is the sciences' great strength, but also their weakness. When arguing against common experience there are 7 billion (or more) votes one way against the hypothesis that votes the other. The experience of free will is one particularly pernicious example of this. Science says that it cannot exist in the sense in which we are used to thinking of it. This is often savagely argued against on emotional grounds even by those who accept the fatal arguments against it.
But the scientific view does not (as usual) solve any problems, only creates other philosophical problems such as how does the feeling of free will arise, how should one deal with questions of responsibility, how should criminals be punished, or saints rewarded?
Such questions go to the heart of the laws by which civilization is sustained. The concept of mens rea - the guilty mind - and of intention and decisions sits there at the centre of criminal law.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm pretty sure I never really make decisions. I'm aware that there is a choice but I feel decision making is actually more an inchoate awareness of what you are going to do whether you want to, feel its morally correct to, think its a good idea, or not.
ReplyDeleteTwo simple examples:
I have a hangover and I am in greggs, which sandwich should i choose?
I am fully aware that the chicken and sweetcorn baguette is too salty, the chicken is poor quality, the whole thing too stodgy and bland to get to the end of, and it doesn't work; it doesn't cure or progress the hangover in anyway. However this is the one I seem to go for every time. Something in me I have no control over overrides what should be a basic decision; an informed decision. I tried to grasp control of this situation and exert my free will and in the following way:
I informed a friend of mine whom I was often with when purchasing hangover food that this was a decision I often made and regretted and could she remind me at decision point that this was the case. She very faithfully did this, with the following result, I said, "you know what? Today I really think I DO want a chicken and sweetcorn baguette, it will really hit the spot" It didn't. I no longer buy them, I think finally my body developed a pavlovian response (absolutely not freewill) to the ensuing nausea and disappointment.
I was merely a pawn in the war between some kind of chicken and sweetcorn instinct I redundantly possess, and the eventual subconscious link between these baguettes and not feeling very well.
Similarly in the run up to such a situation I either become aware that I am going to stay out for another drink and that is a manifestly bad idea, or that I am going to go home. I never make that decision, I merely feel compelled to do one or the other.