Free Will The Basics by Nolan Doroski for the Freethinking Community - 9/27/15

Goals -Introduce the major schools of thought in the philosophy free will. -Create a shared language with which to discuss and/or disagree more productively. -Avoid common roadblocks, dead ends, and non-sequiturs common in free will debates.

Contents Part 1: Major Positions -Major Differences -Libertarianism (philosophical, not political) -Hard Determinism -Hard Incompatibilism -Compatibilism

Contents Part 2: Toward the Sanest View -Science and Free Will -Responsibility -Conclusions -Further Reading

Major Differences -Does free will exist? -Is determinism true? -Are freedom and determinism/indeterminism compatible?

Libertarianism Stances: -Free will exists. -Determinism is false. -Determinism is incompatible with free will.

Libertarianism Brenda the businesswoman: -On the way to a meeting, Brenda witnesses a mugging. -She desires to stop the mugging. -She also desires to make it to her meeting. -Nothing determines her action either way. Brenda witnesses mugging Brenda desires to help Brenda desires to leave Undetermined processes (agent causation, quantum effects) Brenda leaves Brenda helps

Libertarianism Why be a Libertarian? -The ability to do otherwise is necessary for freedom, and requires indeterminism. -Indeterminism is true. -Determinism and free will are incompatible (Incompatibilism). -The Consequence Argument

Libertarianism The Consequence Argument On determinism: Laws of nature + past events = our actions Laws of nature = not up to us Past events = not up to us Our actions = not up to us

Libertarianism Objections: -Determinism is true (or true enough) -Free will and determinism are compatible (see compatibilism) -Problem of Luck -Even if indeterminism applies to human actions, this amounts to randomness, not freedom.

Libertarianism Brenda witnesses mugging Brenda desires to help Brenda desires to leave Luck? Randomness? Cosmic dice? Undetermined processes (agent causation, quantum effects) Brenda leaves Brenda helps

Libertarianism Murder your family? Cosmic Libertarian D20 Sort of a straw man. For a more sophisticated argument, see Pereboom’s “Disappearing agent” argument (link).

Libertarianism Free Will? Yes Determinism? No Determinism and Free Will? Incompatible

Hard Determinism Stances: -Determinism is true. -Free will does not exist. -Determinism is incompatible with free will.

Hard Determinism Brenda the businesswoman -On the way to a meeting, Brenda witnesses a mugging -Brenda’s psychological physical makeup + the laws of nature totally necessitate one action or another. -Brenda cannot “choose to do other” than what she does. Brenda witnesses mugging Brenda’s psychological/physical makeup + the laws of nature Brenda helps (or leaves)

Hard Determinism Why be a hard determinist? -Determinism is true (enough). -Determinism is incompatible with free will. -Consequence argument

Hard Determinism Objections: -Indeterminism is true -Quantum physics, chaos theory -Responsibility is impossible on determinism -Free will and determinism are actually compatible -(See compatibilism)

Hard Determinism Libertarianism Hard Determinism Free Will? Yes No Determinism and Free Will? Incompatible

The Influence Response The “influence” response: “Causes influence my actions but do not necessitate them.” -probabilistic causation -partial or additive causation

The Influence Response Probabilistic Causation: Indeterministic choice: 50% = eat a pie. 50% = do not eat a pie. Add an influence (pie commercial, didn’t have time for lunch): 70% = eat a pie. 30% = do not eat a pie.

The Influence Response Partial or Additive Causation: Pie commercial = no pie No lunch = no pie Pie commercial + no lunch = pie! Yay Pie! No lunch Pie Threshold No lunch Commercial Commercial

The Influence Response Probabilistic Causation: -Still must deal with critiques of Libertarianism. -Susceptible to the problem of luck. Partial/Additive Causation: -Still must deal with arguments for incompatibilism. -Susceptible to the consequence argument.

Hard Incompatibilism Stances: -Either determinism or indeterminism. -Determinism is incompatible with free will. -Indeterminism is incompatible with free will. -Therefore free will does not exist.

Hard Incompatibilism Why be a hard incompatibilist? -If determinism is true, consequence argument rules out free will. -If indeterminism is true, problem of luck rules out free will. See Derk Pereboom’s argument for hard incompatibilism (link).

Hard Incompatibilism Objections: -Agent causation (or some other mysterious causation) -neither determined, nor random -Alternative definitions of freedom -(See compatibilism)

Hard Incompatibilism Libertarianism Hard Determinism Free Will? Yes No Determinism? Irrelevant Determinism and Free Will? Incompatible Incompatible (and so is indeterminism)

Compatibilism Stances: -Determinism is true. -Free will exists. -Free will is compatible with determinism.

Compatibilism What is freedom? “Lean Compatibilism” -To be free is to have the capability to do what we want, without constraints or impediments (physical restraints, coercion, compulsion) (Kane, 2015, page 13).

Compatibilism -Brenda the businesswoman acts in the absence of coercion or physical restraints. -She is free to perform the action that she most desires to do. -Her desires may be determined by past events and the laws of physics- still free. Brenda witnesses mugging Brenda most strongly desires to help (or leave) No coercion or physical restraints interfere Brenda helps (or leaves)

Compatibilism Why be a compatibilist? -Avoids the problem of luck -Maintains freedom, moral responsibility -Is compatible with determinism and tolerates some amounts of indeterminism -A free will “worth wanting”

Compatibilism Objections: -Freedom requires a true “ability to do otherwise” -Maladaptive desires (addictions, indoctrination, etc.) -Redefinition (special pleading) (see Waller’s critique of some versions of compatibilism (link))

Overview Libertarianism Hard Determinism Hard Incompatibilism Free Will? Yes No Determinism? Irrelevant Determinism and Free Will? Incompatible Incompatible (and so is indeterminism) Compatible

The Philosophical Landscape What do philosophers believe? -2,000 professional philosophers in 99 leading philosophy departments From Philpapers.org (2009) (link)

Part 2: Toward a Saner View -What does science say about free will? -How are responsibility and free will related? -Conclusions -Further reading

Science and Free Will Quantum Mechanics: -Reality is fundamentally undetermined. -Therefore human actions are undetermined = free will Scientific Objections: -Indeterminacy is at the atomic scale. -QM gives “virtual certainties” for large scale things (humans and neurons) -Some interpretations (many worlds, Bohm’s hidden variables) are fundamentally deterministic See also physicist Sean Carroll on determinism and physics (link).

Science and Free Will Philosophical Objections: -Assuming QM proved indeterminacy in human choice, only pure randomness is proven, not freedom worth having -Problem of luck again! Murder your family? Cosmic Quantum D20 See Kane, 2011 chapter 3 and Griffith, 2013 chapter 7

Science and Free Will Libet (1983) -Participants are hooked up to an EEG. -When they feel an “urge” to flex their wrist, They note the time on a “Libet” clock. -They then flex their wrist.

Science and Free Will -1 EEG measures activity in motor cortex, “readiness potential,” rising (-550 ms) -2 Subject feels “urge to flex” at “W” (-200 ms) -3 Subject flexes wrist (0 ms)

Science and Free Will Common (bad) conclusion: Human choices are caused by unconscious processes, therefore there is no free will. -Rising RP also occurred in cases where no action was taken. -Overgeneralization to decisions involving deliberation and “conscious” thought. -Compatibilist free will acknowledges a large role for unconscious processes. See Mele, 2014, chapter 2

Science and Free Will So what is science good for? -How do humans think and decide? -How are the psychology and physiology of human choice related? -How can humans make better choices? Unbelievably good book!

Responsibility What are we looking for? -Good reasons to continue to blame and praise. -Good reasons to continue to punish and reward. -Anything else?

Moral Responsibility Libertarianism: -Indeterminism is the only way to secure an “ability to do otherwise.” -An ability to do otherwise is necessary for responsibility. -Agent must have “ultimate responsibility.” Brenda witnesses mugging Brenda desires to help Brenda desires to leave Undetermined processes (agent causation, quantum effects) Brenda leaves Brenda helps See again Pereboom’s “Disappearing agent” objection (link).

Moral Responsibility Determinism (compatibilism and some others): -People are responsible since actions are still “up to” their personality, desires, character, etc. -Praise, punishment, etc. are a means to change behavior, either directly, or through social norms. -Determinism makes responsibility possible. Brenda witnesses mugging Brenda most strongly desires to help (or leave) No coercion or physical restraints interfere Brenda helps (or leaves) See Zimmerman on consequentialist theories of responsibility (link)

Conclusions -The free will debate is more complex than determinism vs. indeterminism. -Common solutions (quantum physics, “influence” argument, Libet experiments) are rarely as decisive as proponents make them. -Libertarianism is pretty insane. The other positions may differ mostly in language.

Further Reading Introduction: A Contemporary Introduction to Free Will by Robert Kane (2005) Free Will: The Basics by Megan Griffith (2013) Free: Why Science Hasn’t Disproven Free Will by Alfred R. Mele (2014) Advanced: The Oxford Companion to Free Will edited by Robert Kane (2011) Philosophical Disquisitions: Free Will Blog Post Series by John Danaher (see a case for hard incompatibilism, psychopaths and moral responsibility)