I don’t believe in free will.

[sunnysidedown]

When I look at myself— my actions, my thoughts, my feelings— I realize that I am simply a collection of cells and chemical reactions driven by genetics and my environment. From conception as a fertilized egg, all the way to asystole, I have never and will never be in control. The thoughts consuming my head are only a result of my upbringing, my life experience, my physiology— none of which are decided by myself. Everything which makes up "me" is a series of decisions that I am not a part of. There is no free will. What I am is unchangeable, and what I will be is predetermined. My thinking process heavily relies on the fact that I don't believe in souls, or at least, my own soul. I look into the mirror, staring at my eyes, and I see and feel only an empty abyss. If eyes are windows to the soul, I fear that my house is abandoned. What remains is the shell of a puppet chained to chaotic fate. I feel— I know, even, my very own consciousness— is not my own. It's a collection of nucleotides, of cortisol and neurons, of action potentials and ions. It's a snapshot of all the love and hate in the world, of empathy entwined with greed, of hedonism that leads to agony, of raw human nature. It's the inevitable march of time, pushing me forward when all I want is to be left behind. My thoughts aren't my own, but instead are an amalgamation of others'. And now, after reading this, my thoughts are a part of your's as well.
——————
A toast, to self-identity.

 

[Forever Sleep]

I agree with this to an extent but then, it doesn't help me with the most heinous things people get up to. Were they hugely likely to take that path and make those (terrible) decisions? Very possibly. Did they have to though? I still struggle with that one. I want to say no because I think we need accountability to hold things together. Maybe they are only partly accountable though. It's certainly important to examine what lead them to do what they did. Maybe resisting the urge to do bad things is also something we inherit or are taught though too. So yeah, I also tend to wonder just how much of it is free choice rather than simply the result of everything we inherited and, everything we experienced/ learned.

A couple of questions if I may: Do you have sympathy then for all the most heinous criminals? It wasn't their fault after all. Do you have admiration for people who do exceptionally well? It wasn't a real achievdment- it was an inevitable result of their genes and upbringing.

Do you believe in a force/ intention behind the world? A God etc. So- did they intend for us to turn out the way we did? Did they engineer Hitler?

I'm not sure how I feel about the concept as a practical reality. It does have a lot of merit. I don't like it as a model though because, I think it promotes lazyness and kills all motivation.

As in- it's not my fault I failed or, perpetrated that crime (not me, just generally speaking.) Whatever I do, I'm destined to fail with my bad lot in life. I guess that may be true but I do definitely believe that if we don't even try, we almost definitely won't succeed. Plus, I think people do deserve praise when they achieve things. Otherwise, why would we bother to try?

 

[davidtorez]

I think the best argument philosophically that ive heard against the notion of free will that most people believe in i.e the ability to have done otherwise , is an argument i heard given by Galen strawson from Oxford university. Its goes something like this:
Premise 1: In order to be truly responsible for your actions, you must be truly responsible for the way you are (i.e., your character, preferences, motivations).
Premise 2: You cannot be truly responsible for the way you are, because it is the result of factors beyond your control (genetics, environment, upbringing, etc.).
Conclusion: Therefore, you cannot be truly responsible for your actions in a deep inherent sense .

I do personally believe that belief in free will has pragmatic value, and we still should punish people for behaviour modification reasons and deterrent etc. But to punish someone just for the sake of seeing them suffer to get some sort of enjoyment out of seeing them suffer makes zero sense to me

 

[_Gollum_]

A couple of questions if I may: Do you have sympathy then for all the most heinous criminals? It wasn't their fault after all.

Yes.

Do you have admiration for people who do exceptionally well? It wasn't a real achievdment- it was an inevitable result of their genes and upbringing.

Correct, I do not really have "admiration" for them. Someone else with the same genes/chemical environment/upbringing/etc. would have ended up in the same place.

Do you believe in a force/ intention behind the world? A God etc. So- did they intend for us to turn out the way we did? Did they engineer Hitler?

No, to me it's just blind biology. None of this was "designed" or "engineered."

I'm not sure how I feel about the concept as a practical reality. It does have a lot of merit. I don't like it as a model though because, I think it promotes lazyness and kills all motivation.

As in- it's not my fault I failed or, perpetrated that crime (not me, just generally speaking.) Whatever I do, I'm destined to fail with my bad lot in life. I guess that may be true but I do definitely believe that if we don't even try, we almost definitely won't succeed. Plus, I think people do deserve praise when they achieve things. Otherwise, why would we bother to try?

I think there's a definitional misunderstanding here though. When a lot of people think about there being "no free will," they tend to think that their entire life, their every move, is already "predetermined," in the same way that an author determines the lifestory of their characters. At least for me, that's not what I mean.

To clarify: genes determine capacity, or expression, moreso than outcome. For example, you could have someone who has the genetic capacity for depression but nothing ever happens in their environment to make them use up that capacity. Someone could have the genetic capacity for violence, but they live in a pacifist society that means they never develop into a violent person. To take a more positive example, someone could become an elite athlete because have the genetic capacity to be become one and they are allowed the opportunity to fully develop that capacity -- but we understand that someone else in those same environmental circumstances, but without the genetic capacity, would not get anywhere, nor would someone with the genetic capacity but no opportunity to develop it.

So it doesn't follow from the lack of free will that it doesn't make sense to even try, because you don't know what your capacities are. That's why I still believe in rehabilitation for prisoners, for example; they might have the capacity to be a perfectly peaceful, contributing member of society, if given the opportunity.

I'd recommend checking out Robert Sapolsky's work to understand this perspective more in-depth. He talks about the blame and praise issue at 32:10.

 

[Forever Sleep]

Yes.


Correct, I do not really have "admiration" for them. Someone else with the same genes/chemical environment/upbringing/etc. would have ended up in the same place.


No, to me it's just blind biology. None of this was "designed" or "engineered."


I think there's a definitional misunderstanding here though. When a lot of people think about there being "no free will," they tend to think that their entire life, their every move, is already "predetermined," in the same way that an author determines the lifestory of their characters. At least for me, that's not what I mean.

To clarify: genes determine capacity, or expression, moreso than outcome. For example, you could have someone who has the genetic capacity for depression but nothing ever happens in their environment to make them use up that capacity. Someone could have the genetic capacity for violence, but they live in a pacifist society that means they never develop into a violent person. To take a more positive example, someone could become an elite athlete because have the genetic capacity to be become one and they are allowed the opportunity to fully develop that capacity -- but we understand that someone else in those same environmental circumstances, but without the genetic capacity, would not get anywhere, nor would someone with the genetic capacity but no opportunity to develop it.

So it doesn't follow from the lack of free will that it doesn't make sense to even try, because you don't know what your capacities are. That's why I still believe in rehabilitation for prisoners, for example; they might have the capacity to be a perfectly peaceful, contributing member of society, if given the opportunity.

I'd recommend checking out Robert Sapolsky's work to understand this perspective more in-depth. He talks about the blame and praise issue at 32:10.

That makes a great deal of sense. Thank you for clarifying.