This implies that we are just robots who have no power of choice whatsoever and all we can do is observe the way our pre-
Dualism allowing the possibility of Libertarianism: Either the laws of nature as we know them are incomplete and not all deterministic or humans, and some other life forms, consist of something more than material which is subject to deterministic laws and Physicalism is false. This is consistent with how we perceive reality to be. That we have the power to influence the world around us.
Bruce Hood [2] (p89) says:
but then continues to say:
Why not? Apparently because science has not, or cannot, find any.
Having your cake and eating it?
Most people would affirm a deterministic Universe, based on a physicalist interpretation of science, but do not wish to give up the idea of free will. Especially their own.
This has led to a huge amount of dubious argument which attempts to say that we can possess freedom while being entirely made up of deterministic materials. Not surprisingly, these attempts do not stand up to scrutiny.
Compatibilism is the de facto way by which most people view the Universe, ourselves and others but it relies on taking a blinkered view and is only possible because the deterministic character of the Universe is not apparent in everyday life.
In order to do this, some have redefined “freedom” to mean not limited by external physical constraints.
This move avoids the problem of physical determinism by pretending that it does not exist and acting as if our intuition of having some freedom of choice is true.
Is this a legitimate way of allowing for consciousness and free will to emerge from deterministic material systems — or does it simply dodge the deeper question? The philosopher Immanuel Kant criticised vague appeals to freedom within a causally determined world as a “wretched subterfuge” — a poor excuse that fails to resolve the conflict between natural determinism and human moral responsibility. Instead, he proposed a more radical solution: that we must understand ourselves as belonging to two realms — the natural, where causality rules, and the moral, where freedom is real. But can such a dual-
It only works because, just as we cannot know whether someone else has conscious experience, we cannot tell whether someone else has free will or is an automaton.
Illusionism: There are others, eg. [2], who would affirm hard determinism but say that because the world is unpredictable, and can therefore have the appearance of indeterminacy, that is just as good. In reality, it has all the problems of hard determinism even if some people choose, or have no choice but, to deny it.
It is claimed that any significant choice which we make in life is fully determined by the person which we have become. They depend on the beliefs, desires and values which we possess but which we had no choice over.
This even includes choices to cultivate certain values which we desire to have because we believe they are good, either for us or someone else. But where did that desire and belief come from? Sooner or later we track back to something over which we had no choice.
When you think through a decision, on what basis is that decision made?
“A combination of abilities and dispositions that you were born with and information and thinking skills that you acquired. In other words, a combination of hereditary factors and environment. There is no third place for anything else to come from. You were not responsible for how you emerged from the womb nor for the world you found yourself in. Once you became old enough and sufficiently self-
[1] Julian Baggini, “Freedom Regained, the possibility of free will”, Granta 2015, ISBN 978 1 84708 718 8
[2] Bruce Hood, “The Self Illusion”, Constable 2011, ISBN 978-
Isaac Bashevis Singer
As well as being conscious beings, we have, at least the impression, of being able to affect the world around us by the choices which we make.
As with consciousness, this phenomenon of “free will” is something which science is not able to address despite many attempts to make it do so.
Most people take it for granted that we have freedom of choice, albeit limited by external circumstances and our own abilities.
However there are challenges to just how free, if at all, that we are.
Is free will just an illusion with our conscious selves being purely observers?
There are two major routes we can take in response to what we observe.
Physicalism leading to Hard Determinism: Since our brains are physical objects, and if our minds are nothing but our brains, we cannot have any choice and the perception of freedom is therefore an illusion.