Other Views on Free Will

Sapolsky, a renowned neuroscientist, delves into how our genes, brain chemistry, and environments interact in complex ways that predetermine our actions, leaving little room for the concept of free will as traditionally understood. The book presents a compelling argument that our choices are influenced by factors beyond our conscious control, ranging from genetic predispositions to the impacts of stress and hormones. Sapolsky uses a combination of scientific evidence and accessible storytelling to explore the implications of this perspective for understanding human behavior, morality, and the justice system. His work encourages readers to rethink accountability, empathy, and societal structures in the light of these scientific insights. This book is a thought-provoking journey through the science behind our decisions, challenging readers to reconsider the essence of human agency and freedom.

In my book, “The Science of Free Will,” I explore the concept of free will from a perspective that spans a wide range of disciplines, highlighting the intricate nature of determinism and its implications on the notion of free will. Despite the deterministic framework of the universe, I argue for the existence of “Free Will in Practice” due to the complexity and unpredictability inherent in human decision-making, within the constraints set by physical laws. This approach acknowledges the deterministic nature of physical reality, while also suggesting that, within this framework, humans exhibit a form of agency or choice-making that feels and functions as free will, especially in practical, everyday contexts.

Contrastingly, Robert Sapolsky delves into the biological and neurological determinants of behavior, emphasizing the limitations on our autonomy and suggesting that free will is an illusion, a product of our ignorance of the underlying determinants of our actions. His perspective is deeply rooted in neuroscience, biology, and psychology, showcasing how predetermined factors such as genetics, brain chemistry, and environmental influences shape our decisions in ways we are often unaware of.

The difference between Sapolsky’s views and mine can be summarized thus: Sapolsky focuses on the evidence from neuroscience and biology that underscores the constraints on our autonomy, advocating for a perception of free will as an illusion shaped by unrecognized determinants of behavior. On the other hand, I, while acknowledging the deterministic nature of physical laws, propose a nuanced understanding that reconciles determinism with the practical experience of free will. I suggest that the unpredictability and complexity inherent in human decision-making allow for a form of free will that is significant and meaningful in our daily lives.

My book challenges readers to consider the boundaries between determinism and human agency, proposing that despite the deterministic fabric of the universe, the practical implications and lived experience of our choices manifest a form of free will that is essential to our comprehension of human behavior, morality, and responsibility. This juxtaposition fosters a compelling dialogue between the hard determinism grounded in biological and neurological science and a compatibilist stance that seeks to accommodate agency within a deterministic framework.

Sam Harris argues that free will is an illusion, contending that our thoughts, intentions, and actions are all determined by prior causes. According to Harris, our sense of agency is nothing more than a mental construct, a byproduct of brain states and environmental influences that are far beyond our control. He draws heavily on neuroscience and psychology to make the case that the idea of free will is a myth, one that crumbles under the scrutiny of scientific evidence.

In my book, I also acknowledge the deterministic nature of the universe, particularly through the lens of quantum mechanics and physics. However, I introduce the concept of “Free Will in Practice” (FWIP), which differentiates between free will in theory (FWIT) and the practical experience of free will. While I agree with Harris that the fundamental particles that compose us follow deterministic laws, I argue that the complexity of human actions leads to an unpredictability that can be perceived as free will in our everyday lives. This concept of computational irreducibility, where outcomes cannot be easily predicted or reduced, forms the core of my argument that, although free will may not exist in theory, it does exist in practice.

While Harris’s work is grounded primarily in philosophical determinism and contemporary neuroscience, focusing on how our brain states dictate our decisions before we are even aware of them, my approach is more interdisciplinary. I expand the discussion to include quantum physics, computation, and even everyday phenomena like traffic patterns and artificial intelligence. Though I share Harris’s view on the deterministic nature of the universe, I diverge by exploring how the unpredictability inherent in human behavior allows for a form of practical free will, which has significant implications not just for ethics, but also for the development of AI and economic theory.

Harris sees the deterministic nature of the universe as undermining concepts like moral responsibility and agency, leading to a more fatalistic view of human behavior. In contrast, I present a more optimistic perspective, suggesting that even within a deterministic framework, the unpredictability of our decisions allows for a meaningful sense of agency. While our choices might be determined in theory, the sheer complexity and unpredictability of these decisions give us a kind of freedom that matters in practice—whether in making ethical decisions or in designing AI systems that respect human autonomy.

In essence, while both The Science of Free Will and Free Will explore the challenging relationship between determinism and human freedom, they do so in different ways. Harris leans heavily into the neuroscientific and philosophical implications, whereas I bridge these ideas with insights from physics and computation, ultimately proposing a view that acknowledges determinism but also carves out a space for practical free will.

List argues for a compatibilist understanding of free will, asserting that free will is a real and scientifically viable concept when properly understood. He posits that free will should be considered at the level of persons and their capacities for reasoning, decision-making, and agency, rather than being dismissed due to the deterministic nature of physical processes at a microscopic level. By distinguishing between different levels of description—physical, psychological, and rational—List makes a case for the compatibility of free will with a scientifically informed view of the world.

In my book, “The Science of Free Will,” I explore the notion of free will within a deterministic universe, arguing for a practical form of free will that emerges from the complexity and unpredictability of human decisions. While acknowledging the deterministic underpinnings of the universe, I maintain that the nuanced experiences of making choices provide a substantive sense of autonomy and free will, crucial for understanding human behavior, morality, and responsibility.

List’s work complements my exploration by offering a philosophical and multidisciplinary perspective that defends the reality of free will against skepticism. He leverages insights from philosophy of mind, cognitive science, and social sciences to articulate a model of free will that is consistent with our best scientific theories. This approach underscores the importance of considering human agents at the appropriate level of analysis to accurately understand the phenomena of choice and agency.

While both our works defend the reality and significance of free will, they do so from slightly different angles and with different emphases. My book bridges the gap between determinism and the lived experience of free will, focusing on how practical free will operates within the constraints of deterministic physical laws. In contrast, List’s work directly engages with and counters the arguments of free will skeptics, providing a philosophical framework that reaffirms free will’s coherence and compatibility with a scientific worldview.

Together, “The Science of Free Will” and “Why Free Will Is Real” offer readers a comprehensive understanding of free will, challenging deterministic and reductionist narratives by showcasing the complexity of human agency and the robustness of free will as a concept grounded in both philosophical reasoning and scientific insights. List’s book enriches the discussion by rigorously defending free will’s reality, complementing the broader examination of how free will manifests in our daily lives and underpins our sense of self and moral responsibility.

This book serves as an accessible entry point for readers new to the topic, offering clear explanations of complex ideas and introducing key figures and arguments in the philosophy of free will.

In contrast, my book, “The Science of Free Will,” explores the concept of free will from a perspective that integrates determinism with a form of practical free will, anchored in the unpredictability and complexity of human decision-making. While I acknowledge the deterministic underpinnings of the universe, I argue for a nuanced view that recognizes a form of agency or choice-making that, in practical terms, operates as free will within the constraints of physical laws.

“Free Will: A Very Short Introduction” primarily focuses on the philosophical dimensions of free will, examining historical and contemporary debates within the field. Pink’s analysis is rooted in philosophy, addressing questions of ethics, metaphysics, and the relationship between free will and determinism. This philosophical approach contrasts with my more interdisciplinary method, which draws upon physics, neuroscience, and philosophy to argue that a practical form of free will exists within a deterministic framework.

While Pink’s book provides readers with a solid foundation in the philosophical aspects of free will, my work seeks to bridge the gap between determinism and the subjective experience of making choices, suggesting that free will’s practical aspects are meaningful and significant for our daily lives.

“Free Will: A Very Short Introduction” complements my book by offering a broader understanding of the philosophical context, enriching the reader’s grasp of the complex and multifaceted nature of the free will debate. Together, these books offer a multidimensional view of free will, combining philosophical insights with considerations of how scientific discoveries impact our understanding of human agency, autonomy, and the capacity to choose.

The book gathers insights from physics, philosophy, and theology to offer a comprehensive understanding of the complex interplay between predetermined universe laws and the concept of human freedom.

This work contrasts with my approach in “The Science of Free Will,” where I advocate for the coexistence of determinism with a form of practical free will, rooted in the unpredictability and complexity of human decisions. “Determinism and Free Will” delves deeper into the theoretical underpinnings and implications of determinism, examining how advancements in physics, particularly in quantum mechanics and theories of the universe, influence our philosophical and theological interpretations of free will.

While the authors explore the limits and possibilities of free will within a universe governed by deterministic laws, they also engage with philosophical and theological perspectives that question and expand the definitions and scope of determinism and free will. Their work seeks to reconcile seemingly opposing views by considering new scientific discoveries and philosophical insights, presenting a dialogue that spans beyond the confines of traditional disciplines.

In contrast, my book emphasizes the practical aspects of free will within a deterministic framework, suggesting that the complexity of human decision-making processes allows for a meaningful experience of choice and autonomy, despite the deterministic nature of the universe. “Determinism and Free Will” complements this perspective by providing a broader theoretical context, examining the foundational questions and implications of these concepts across different fields of knowledge.

Both works contribute to the ongoing discourse on determinism and free will, offering readers a nuanced understanding of these complex concepts. While my book focuses on reconciling determinism with the lived experience of free will, “Determinism and Free Will” provides a multidisciplinary exploration of the theoretical aspects of this debate, enriching the conversation with insights from physics, philosophy, and theology.

Mitchell’s book takes a biologically rooted stance, exploring how the evolution of the human brain has endowed us with a form of free will. Mitchell argues that our capacity for free will emerges from the complexity of our neural networks, shaped over millennia by evolutionary processes. He suggests that free will is not a mystical force but rather an evolved capability that allows us to act as autonomous agents in the world, making decisions that are not entirely dictated by our genetic or environmental backgrounds. His work is deeply grounded in the fields of neuroscience and evolutionary biology, emphasizing the idea that free will is a natural consequence of the way our brains have developed over time.

In contrast, my book, The Science of Free Will, takes a broader, more interdisciplinary approach. While I acknowledge the deterministic nature of the universe, particularly through the lens of quantum mechanics and physics, I introduce the concept of “Free Will in Practice” (FWIP). This idea differentiates between the theoretical absence of free will (FWIT) and the practical experience of it in our daily lives. Unlike Mitchell, who attributes free will to the evolution of our neural networks, I argue that the unpredictability and complexity of human actions—rooted in computational irreducibility—allow for a practical form of free will. This concept means that even though our actions are theoretically determined by the laws of physics, in practice, they are unpredictable enough to be considered free.

Mitchell’s book is deeply embedded in the biological sciences, focusing on how our evolutionary history has shaped our current capabilities for decision-making. He presents free will as an evolved trait that enhances our ability to navigate complex social environments and make decisions that are not wholly constrained by our biology. This view offers a perspective that free will is not only real but is an adaptive feature of human nature.

On the other hand, my approach in The Science of Free Will encompasses not only biology but also physics, computation, and philosophy. While I do not dispute the role of evolution in shaping human behavior, I emphasize the deterministic nature of the universe and how, despite this, we experience a form of free will due to the inherent unpredictability of complex systems. This view suggests that while our actions are determined by physical laws, the sheer complexity of these interactions creates a space where free will can be practically experienced.

Both Free Agents and The Science of Free Will offer compelling narratives on the existence of free will, but from different vantage points. Mitchell views free will as an evolved trait that arises from the complexity of our neural architecture, whereas I explore how this complexity, when viewed through the lens of physics and computation, allows for a practical experience of free will even in a deterministic universe. While we both agree that free will exists in some form, our explanations for its origin and nature differ, providing readers with a rich and diverse exploration of one of humanity’s most profound questions.