by I M Probulos
I hope you enjoy this E-book and if so, please share it with your friends. You can help support my work by purchasing my other Kindle books on Amazon.com and providing positive feedback. You can contact me at my website: www.improbulos.com. You can also follow me on Twitter @improbulos.
I. M. Probulos
Definitions and Issues
What’s The Harm?
I lot of people ask me why I write so many books for atheists, agnostics, and secular humanists. Why bother? The quick answer is I wish to promote modern science, the scientific method, and reason–even when it may be uncomfortable or incompatible with long-held beliefs.
I do not consider faith or belief in the supernatural, superstition, or religion a good thing. I am not anti-religion, I am pro-science. I think honest skepticism is a good thing and that faith without evidence is a bad thing.
Superstitious, unprovable theories lead to wasted time and money. Homeopathy, astrology, séances, ghosts, UFO's, ESP, talking to the dead, Reiki, crystals, and the Law of Attraction are all examples of pseudoscience and superstition.
They are great for the peddlers of such nonsense but bad for the ignorant and gullible who spend their hard-earned money on unsubstantiated claims and outright deceptions. Many of these operate on the “blame the victim” strategy where the lack of success is because “you did not believe enough.” This is the perfect con and has been used for centuries. If your claim cannot be substantiated then blame it on the victim. To me, this is unconscionable behavior–and if there were a God He would put a stop to it.
That is a tautology, in case you wanted another example. (Since the behavior persists, therefore, there is no God.)
Most everyone wants to believe they are free to make any choice at any time. Accepting the illusion of free will helps us plan a strategy to best avoid factors that impede our ability to make reasoned choices. (This includes addictive behaviors, mind control, and even arguments from authority, popularity, or power.)
Once again, although I may use phrases like “impeding,” “diminishing,” or “limited” free will, I am not conceding we have free will, it is just shortcut terminology to express that a determinist desires positive outcomes, self-actualization, achievement, and happiness–just like everyone else. Accepting determinism will enhance your humanity not reduce it.
Evolving from Bronze-Age Thinking
In the free will debate, most people don't understand the question or confuse concepts. Many of my books such as How to Speak Fluent Atheist, Agnostic, and Secular Humanist address this issue (for instance: faith without evidence, reasonable expectations based on reality, and hope are three separate concepts).
Based on bronze-age thinking, millions ignore the role of genetics, epigenetics, and our environment have on our ability to make choices freely. Instead, they condemn people to hell. Millions are intent on punishing the wicked, and blaming them for being evil. They ignore scientific evidence explaining the impact of post-partum psychosis, injuries to the brain (concussions), and dozens of other factors affecting our ability to make reasoned choices.
Free Will Arguments
This is a list of different approaches to the free will debate. We will discuss each one in greater detail.
1. The meme approach to free will and its historical evolution.
2. Philosophical and logical arguments for and against.
3. Religious and spiritual–denying the 7 Unthinkable Horrors.
4. Arguments from Genetic/Epigenetics
5. Neurobiological evidence.
6. Research from social psychology.
7. The deterministic/materialistic evidence.
8. Quantum mind theories
9. An immaterial soul, consciousness, or mind.
10. Personal responsibility and the legal and societal implications.
Choices
Not having free will does not mean we do not make choices. I cannot emphasize this point enough–it is the number one error I see in free will debates.
Choosing A or B, red over blue, or to shoot someone or run is not proof of free will. They are separate issues. Below is a list of choices that people make every day, regardless of whether free will is real or an illusion. The outcome does not change.
1. They quit an alcohol addiction.
2. They quit gambling.
3. They quit smoking cigarettes.
4. They beat a heroin addiction.
5. They get out of a depression.
6. They get out of poverty.
7. They achieve success in their profession despite an impoverished background and physical abuse.
8. They choose their religious faith (or non-faith).
9. They lose weight
10. They change their diet.
11. A battered woman kills her abuser.
12. A soldier drops on a grenade to save his squadron.
Again, the debate is not about making choices. Throughout our life, we make dozens of minor choices every day and occasionally, a life-changing choice. The question is not if we make a choice or not, it is how did we arrive at that choice? Could we have acted otherwise?
Questions for Case Studies
I would recommend writing these down a piece of paper or index card so you can write on it as you work through the examples I present in this book. With the case studies ask yourself:
Did they have free will at the moment of their action?
Should they be blamed for their action/decision?
Did they behave correctly, or incorrectly?
Are they good or evil?
Should they be punished? How severely?
Did this person act courageously or cowardly? Did they lack will power or self-control?
Are they going to hell? Do they deserve eternal torture and torment?
Could they have acted otherwise?
Is there any evidence or any way to measure a non-material consciousness or free will? What would be a research test for this "free won't?"
Do you at least agree that there is a continuum of free will? Do you agree that there are thousands and potentially millions of factors impacting our ability to decide one way or another at any given moment?
Thinking Fast, Thinking Slow
Daniel Kahneman’s book Thinking, Fast and Slow [Amazon Link] explains things we think we understand but really don't, such as intuition. Kahneman posits a brain governed by two clashing decision-making processes. The largely unconscious System 1, he contends, makes intuitive snap judgments based on emotion, memory, and hard-wired rules of thumb; the rational and deliberate System 2 laboriously checks the facts and does the math, but is so "lazy" and distractible that it usually defers to System 1. This book is fascinating and if you have not read it yet I would put it at the top of your reading list. I will refer to these two systems often in this book.
The unconscious versus conscious mind: Popularized by Freud, many of our attitudes, beliefs and actions are formed at the subconscious level–and then we justify them afterwards. We decide with System 1 (unconscious) and then rationalize with System 2 (conscious). This is also a main component of my argument against free will. We are not consciously aware of all the factors that influence our choices.
Psychology Basics
Here are some quick, key concepts that impact our purported ability to choose freely.
Operant conditioning, a psychological concept popularized by B.F. Skinner, suggests that we only do what is rewarding. If there are positive benefits, the action is repeated; if the behavior is punished, the action stops. The two best examples are fishing and slot machines. They reward us on an intermittent time schedule and the reward can be either very small or very large. That’s why we continue to gamble when we lose, or why we fish all day without catching a single fish. Our future actions are predicated on the timing and magnitude of a reward or punishment.
A radical behaviorist only focuses on outcomes and behavior. You reward good behavior and you stop bad behavior by either withdrawing rewa
rd or quick punishment. Technically it is irrelevant what their motivation is or how they feel. From a radical behaviorist perspective, genetics, epigenetics and our environment is irrelevant–only the outcome.
Classical conditioning is fundamentally different. The most common example of classical conditioning is Pavlov’s dog where the dog associated a bell ring with food and would subsequently salivate whenever the bell rung–whether there was food or not. A modern example is the use of perfume and cologne. We associate sexual arousal with the fragrance of perfume because it is associated with a loved one and sex.
Ways to Look At Free Will
This is a quick list. I will explore these in more depth later.
1. We are like a rock rolling down a hill based on laws of physics and where it lands is neither correct nor incorrect, good nor bad.
2. Character, having character, "the measure of a man" is the result of free will and the choices we make.
3. Religions split into the predeterminism camps (Calvinism, Islam) and the non-predeterminstic camps. This is a theological argument against free will. God chooses who is good or evil; God chooses who goes to heaven or hell; you don’t.
4. Good versus evil: some people are born evil; driven to evil; choose evil; Satan corrupts them.
5. Sin, blame, badness, and punishment (hell).
6. Free will, mind control and addictive behaviors.
7. Neurobiology and free will
8. Philosophy and free will.
9. The Statistical Theory of Everything perspective–the universe does not love you (…aww) and things don’t happen for a reason. Everything is based on probabilities.
10. The illusion of conscious agency.
11. Ruler, king, father, God meme, puppet master version.
12. The Secret™ and the Law of Attraction.
Examples-Partial Free Will Argument
Use our list of questions for the case studies below. Is one freer than the other? In other words, do you agree that there is a spectrum of choices, or the freedom to choose based on gross physical or environmental circumstances?
Aria is in a coma with brain activity but unaware of her surroundings.
Max is given LSD without his knowledge. He experiences hallucinations, an out-of-body experience and believes he is God.
Brooklyn is completely unable to move from the neck down. Only her thoughts are active.
Dylan is chained to his bed and has limited physical mobility.
Connor is about to die within the next sixty seconds. He is weak and his thoughts are fading. How does his free will differ?
Riley is under house arrest as a political prisoner. He cannot speak out or write anything that is critical of the government or religion.
Nicholas was falsely accused of raping a Gabriel’s sister. Gabriel subdued Nicholas and castrated him. Now Nicholas has no sexual desire.
Elijah is a normal human being without obvious, gross physical or constraints.
Lila is a free Angel with supernatural powers; she can fly, be anywhere in an instant, and can read minds. Lila could save Conner’s life.
God is an omniscience, omnipotent, and omnipresent deity. He is all good and has no limits on what He can do.
The example above explores:
Mental freedom (no consciousness)
Ontological freedom (what is reality and the relationship between the mind and reality)
Physical freedom (internal–paralysis)
Physical freedom (external–imprisonment)
Temporal freedom (limited time)
Political freedom
Sexual freedom
A person without any of the obvious, gross constraints above.
Supernatural abilities
A deity with unlimited powers
The examples above illustrate what I call the physical and environmental constraint version of free will. It is predicated on obvious circumstantial constraints. If someone is chained to their bed, then they do not have the freedom to hurt someone. In this definition, free will means the ability to freely choose some thoughts or actions but not others. My definition focuses on more internal and subtle forces such as genetics, epigenetics, and the environment. My argument is that even though we cannot see them, these factors are just as significant–concerning the issue of free will–as being chained to a bed.
An interesting take on the scenarios above is that, based on scripture, we are blamed and considered sinful for thought crimes. Therefore, someone chained to a bed or completely paralyzed could lust in their heart all day–and be condemned to eternal torture and torment–for spurious thoughts that arise in their head. The majority of research indicates that these thoughts arise from System 1 (primal, unconscious) and not System 2 (reasoned, logical). We are being punished for something we were designed (by evolution) to do. For a deity to design us this way and then require us to betray our very nature (to reproduce) is far worse than my contention that there was and is no deity or plan involved.
God and Free Will
Concerning God and the issue of free will, one must ask some logical contradictions about God’s nature:
Can God kill himself?
Can God change his mind if He knows the future?
Can God be and imagine evil?
Can God create a stone so heavy He cannot lift it?
Can and being that can do anything or have anything want or need anything?
If God decided rape was good, would rape therefore be good? [see Deuteronomy 22:28-29*]
Why does an omnipotent, omniscient God create flawed beings (fallen Angels, man)?
Is Satan a necessary being? What would have happened if Satan decided that heaven was not so bad and not rebelled? (I do plan to write this free story someday.)
*If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
–Deuteronomy 22:28-29
The punishment for rape is not death; instead the rapist must stay married to the woman for the rest of his life.
A lot of successful people, Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, and Mark Zuckerberg are not particularly religious and have had great success in their lives. So any theory that assumes that not believing in free will leads to inevitable nihilism and despair is flat out wrong. Mark Twain, Thomas Edison, and even Charles Schultz, of Peanuts fame, were known for their disdain of religion–but they were successful.
If anyone wants to argue that success is more than financial, we can again look to both Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, who have donated billions of dollars to help eradicate diseases in third world countries. Again, this is all based on secular humanitarianism and not any deep religious conviction.
1. The illusion of free will does not equate to nihilism.
2. The illusion of free will does not mean that some choices are not better than others. They clearly are.
3. There will always be consequences for negative or anti-social behaviors. These follow the rules of operant conditioning.
4. The illusion of free will does not mean we do not have personal responsibility.
5. Whether there is a God, or not; whether the universe loves you, or not; whether you have free will, or not–does not matter. You give your life purpose. Only your next action determines your destiny.
There is no evidence that "the universe loves you" crowd and the “the universe is indifferent to you” are any different. I will admit that believing that an invisible man in the sky or the entire universe loves you and wants you to be healthy, happy, and successful is powerful selling point. There is some evidence that the deeply religious are happier. If you believe that way, I don’t think you would be reading this book. It would be great if all that was true, but to my spiritually-challenged brain, it is little more than wishful thinking, affirmation bias, and counting hits more than misses. It’s a cascade of cogniti
ve biases (availability, optimism, and survivor) and neural correlates in our brain. My guess is successful, wealthy, and fortunate people feel that something was responsible for their good fortune [see Oprah], yet, some, like Bill Gates, actually admit that luck had a lot to do with their success.
*Spiritually challenged is another concept of mine referring to a cluster of genetic, epigenetic, and environmental factors that don’t allow one to have faith without evidence. I call it the “show-me gene” or the “skeptic” gene. Technically, it’s not one gene but many factors and this applies to all superstition–not just religion or God.
The Illusion of Free Will
I originally introduced this as the tenth Unthinkable Horror and acknowledge that accepting it has a strong potential for increased anxiety. Asserting that free will is an illusion, that man is a deterministic being–just a very complex machine, impacts all core religious beliefs. Free will is at the very core of all three Abrahamic Religions: Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. It is also one of the reasons there is a war between fundamentalism and science. Recent advances in our understanding of the organic, chemical, and electrical nature of the brain plus our ability to map brain activity in response to particular stimuli using Functional MRI (fMRI) technology (brain imaging) offers us insight into human behavior, morality, and even free will.
Without free will there is no tree of the knowledge of good and evil, no apple in the Garden of Eden, no snake tempting Eve, no Eve tempting Adam, and no fall of man. Without the fall, there is no sin, no angry and jealous God, no global flood, no Tower of Babel, and no reason for the existence, death, or resurrection of Jesus Christ. Without free will, the assertion that the parables, the morality in the Old and New Testaments, and the Commandments are revealed to us by an omniscient deity crumbles like a sand castle on the beach. We wrote it all–every last word; religious scripture represents the best, and to some, the worst of humankind.