To stay up to date with Arthur’s writing, don’t forget to sign up for email notifications whenever a new column is released.
In 2005, renowned writer Ted Chiang crafted a captivating science-fiction tale titled “Predictor,” which was published in the esteemed journal Nature. The story revolved around a small toy known as the Predictor, resembling a car key fob in size. With a button and a green light, this device impressively illuminated a second before the operator pressed the button. Its remarkable ability to predict actions before they were consciously made left users fascinated and, over time, sparked a series of profound realizations. People began to question the very existence of free will as they played with the Predictor. The implications were weighty, leading to the emergence of a condition dubbed “akinetic mutism,” where a third of the population fell into a state of walking coma, devoid of any motivation to live. Some even required hospitalization because they refused to feed themselves. The absence of free will seemed to strip away their sense of truly being alive.
Although Chiang’s story is a work of fiction, it mirrors the challenges science and philosophy currently present to the concept of free will. This, in turn, significantly impacts our happiness. Understanding the debates and deciding how to respond can have a profound effect on our daily lives.
The question of free will arises from the infamous “mind-body problem” in philosophy, which questions whether the mind and the brain are one and the same or separate entities. Renowned philosopher René Descartes grappled with this dilemma in his groundbreaking work, “Meditations on First Philosophy,” published in 1641, where he argued that the mind and body are distinct entities, with the mind existing beyond physical space.
This “dualist” perspective has numerous modern proponents, both religious and secular. Take, for example, Australian philosopher David Chalmers, who believes that consciousness is not physical or material, stating that it is possible to exist physically without consciousness, akin to a zombie. This suggests that consciousness exists outside the realm of the material world.
If this is true, where then does the mind reside? Some argue that the mind is within the soul or is the soul itself, which may exist beyond physical death. Others propose a concept called panpsychism, suggesting that a degree of consciousness inhabits all natural bodies. Regardless of where the mind resides, it appears to be the essence that allows us to make decisions and express independent choice – our free will. An apt metaphor for this viewpoint is to consider the brain as the computer and the mind as the operator.
In contrast, proponents of “physicalism” argue that subjective experiences and consciousness solely emanate from the brain, dismissing the idea of a separate mind. To use the previous metaphor, there is no external operator.
While we may not fully comprehend the connection between consciousness and the brain, the absence of a specific brain component responsible for conscious self-awareness does not disprove the existence of the mind. After all, we accept that the universe is purely physical, despite an incomplete understanding of it. Therefore, it is illogical to assume that the mind is separate from the brain simply due to our limited knowledge.
This line of reasoning also explains why many physicalists reject the notion of free will. As Stanford neuroscientist Robert Sapolsky succinctly puts it, “What we call ‘free will’ is simply the biology that we haven’t understood well enough yet.” Moreover, these thinkers point to evidence showing that many actions we perceive as voluntary actually originate before we are consciously aware of them. With approximately 86 billion neurons and an estimated 100 trillion links within our brains, the complexity far surpasses the conscious control of our will. By the time we decide to eat a cookie, our brain has already initiated the action.
Nevertheless, a hybrid argument for free will exists, acknowledging the complexity of the brain and the possibility that not every decision is consciously made. This perspective suggests that decisions influencing our daily patterns may occur automatically. For example, we may not consciously choose our daily route to work, but we did freely choose the job location, which limits our commuting options. Similarly, we might make moral commitments through careful consideration, and those commitments then shape our subsequent automatic decision-making.
The puzzle of free will won’t be fully solved here. I have my own beliefs, as do you, but they remain speculative. The focus at hand is how to best enhance our happiness while acknowledging this uncertainty. The answer, despite doubts, lies in embracing the idea of our own free will over our actions and lives. This pragmatic strategy is akin to Blaise Pascal’s famous wager concerning belief in God. Pascal argued that it is beneficial to believe, as even if one is wrong, the losses are minimal, while being right could yield tremendous gains if one lives accordingly.
Social scientists have discovered that a belief in free will is associated with higher life satisfaction among adolescents and adults. This finding holds true across different cultures, both collectivist and individualist. Moreover, one’s belief in free will can have a profound impact on behavior. Research suggests that individuals with weaker beliefs in free will tend to score higher in aggression and conformity, while displaying lower self-control.
Moreover, simply exposing individuals to statements about free will can influence their attitudes towards life. In a study published in Philosophical Psychology in 2016, participants were asked to read affirmations of free will or denials of free will. Those exposed to pro-free will statements were more likely to set meaningful goals for themselves, while those exposed to anti-free will statements perceived less meaning in their lives.
If you firmly believe in free will, consider affirming this belief each day. Remind yourself that each day presents choices – to love or hate, to give or take, to move forward or backward in life. Strive to make better choices whenever possible. Furthermore, when you experience negative emotions, remember that while these feelings may arise involuntarily, you have the power to manage your reactions to them.
Even if you harbor doubts about the reality of free will, you can still benefit from acting as if it exists, as research suggests. There is no need to spend your days hoping that external factors align to grant you a pleasant experience. Instead, focusing on the concept of free will can inspire you to take control of your life in a positive way. If you adopt a hybrid mindset, concentrate on your major life goals that you believe are within your control.
In conclusion, the strategy proposed here aligns with the one embraced by Ted Chiang in his story. The narrator, communicating from one year in the future, employs the same technology depicted by the Predictor. Reflecting on the devastation caused when people embrace the notion of lacking free will, he imparts a powerful message: “Pretend that you have free will.” Essentially, he advises readers to embrace the concept of free will, regardless of the underlying reality. This pragmatic approach, bolstered by research, can potentially lead to a more fulfilling and happier life.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
