Posted by Mark H. on December 9, 2004, at 18:38:20
In reply to Re: Free will conundrum explored » Mark H., posted by alexandra_k on December 7, 2004, at 20:04:21
Dear Alexandra,
Even if my neurons start firing or my muscles start moving before I am conscious of having made a decision, my ability to affirm and renew that decision repeatedly in the future (or to make a different decision) is suggestive of free will. Free will takes place within a larger context, certainly, and subject to the constraints of the environment, which is inclusive of personal biology, upbringing, beliefs and life experiences, among other things.
Personal freedom may be an illusion in the ultimate sense, then, but it exists within relative reality, doesn't it? Ask anyone who has successfully quit drinking. Resisting a compulsion -- or making an altruistic choice -- requires going against something akin to instinct. Absent free will, who would ever donate a kidney or do without food in protest of an injustice? Freedom is being able to change the implementation or direction of that neuronal impulse that preceded thought or action.
Perhaps we can neither prove nor disprove the existence of free will, and it becomes a matter of belief. To whatever extent, we are free to choose our beliefs based on the experiences they are likely to create for ourselves and others. If a belief in "no free will" leads me to nihilism and despair (or illusions of not being accountable for my actions), then it is not a very helpful belief. If a belief in "free will" makes me more optimistic, and I conduct myself in ways that make me a more compassionate person, then that belief is useful, even if it is empirically false.
I've done a little editing for a Skinnerian behaviorist, and I find that my personal belief about behaviorism is that its premises are flawed but its effects are often laudable. So I have no problem practicing the techniques of cognitive-behavioral therapy, for instance, and benefit from doing so, even though I reject the idea that negative thoughts necessarily precede negative feelings.
You wrote: "We need to decide what we mean by freedom, and well, if we want to be free then we need to define it in such a way so that we can have it!" I couldn't agree with you more.
My clumsy analogy is that we are like captains of ships at sea, bound to the water, traveling in agreed-upon shipping lanes, dependent on our schedule and crew, yet we still control the helm. Whether we deliver our cargo on time or run the ship aground depends on the freedom we have to influence the outcome. To loop back to where I began, isn't freedom to influence the outcome a practical definition of free will?
At another level, I think your thoughts on free will and mine likely converge in religion, but I doubt I'm smart enough to go there with you. I really enjoy the way you think and express yourself, and I appreciate the time you invest in these discussions.
With kind regards,
Mark H.
poster:Mark H.
thread:424323
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20041209/msgs/426896.html