JOEL PEARSON: Do we have free will? Is anything our fault?
Oct 22, 2024
auto_awesome
Joel Pearson, a neuroscientist and cognitive expert from the University of New South Wales, explores the intriguing question of whether free will is merely an illusion. He delves into the implications of AI and social media on our choices, highlighting the risks to personal agency. The conversation also touches on the synchronization in nature, like murmurations, and how compassion can reshape our understanding of responsibility. Ultimately, Pearson challenges us to reconsider our beliefs about autonomy and the impact of external forces on our decision-making.
The concept of free will may be an illusion shaped by genetics and environmental factors, challenging our understanding of personal agency.
Determinism suggests that our decisions are influenced by factors extending back to the origins of the universe, complicating accountability.
Priming our environment and mindset can enhance perceived agency and focus, allowing us to steer outcomes despite underlying influences.
Deep dives
The Nature of Free Will
The notion of free will has been a contentious topic among philosophers and scientists, with many arguing that it is an illusion. This perspective suggests that our choices may not be as autonomous as we believe, but rather influenced by a complex interplay of genetics, past experiences, and external factors. For instance, research indicates that decisions may be determined in the brain before we are consciously aware of them, with some studies demonstrating that brain activity can predict choices up to 11 seconds prior to a person's conscious decision. This challenges the traditional view of personal agency and responsibility, raising important questions about accountability in various social contexts.
Determinism vs. Agency
The concept of determinism posits that every event or choice is a result of preceding factors, potentially extending back to the origins of the universe. This raises implications for both ethical and practical decision-making, suggesting that our sense of agency is often an oversimplified understanding of a far more complex decision-making process. Much research supports the idea that our environments, emotions, and even physiological states significantly influence our choices, such as how hunger can affect a judge's sentencing decisions or a surgeon's performance. As such, the perception that individuals possess complete autonomy in decision-making becomes increasingly scrutinized.
Implications for Society and Justice
If free will is indeed an illusion, this carries significant implications for our social and legal systems, particularly in how we administer justice. The argument follows that individuals may not be wholly responsible for their actions, especially in cases influenced by impairments such as trauma or mental illness. This perspective advocates for a shift from punitive measures to rehabilitative practices, suggesting that understanding the underlying causes of behavior can lead to more compassionate and effective societal responses. The challenge lies in balancing this understanding with the need to maintain societal order and safety.
The Role of Priming in Decision-Making
Priming, the psychological phenomenon where exposure to a stimulus influences responses to subsequent stimuli, plays a pivotal role in shaping our decisions. By deliberately structuring our environment or mindset, we can encourage certain outcomes, highlighting a method to harness our perceived agency even within the context of determinism. For example, creating vision boards or setting clear intentions can help individuals focus on specific goals, thereby enhancing the likelihood of achieving them through increased awareness and engagement. This suggests that while our choices may be influenced by multiple factors, the way we prime ourselves can still significantly steer the outcomes of our lives.
Compassionate Awareness and Action
Recognizing the limitations of free will encourages a more compassionate awareness of human behavior, both in ourselves and others. Understanding that actions may result from a myriad of influences can lead to decreased judgment and increased empathy towards individuals who commit harmful acts. This shift can inspire societal movements towards prevention, support, and rehabilitation rather than punishment alone. Ultimately, fostering a culture of understanding and awareness can empower individuals to take meaningful actions that contribute positively to their communities, recognizing that while our choices may be influenced, we still have the capacity for growth and change.
Prof. Joel Pearson (Neuroscientist; AI and cognition scientist) returns to Wild, this time to discuss whether free will is an illusion. In our last chat (about intuition) the subject was raised and Joel promised to come back to discuss it further, particularly in the context of AI, algorithms, the rise of totalitarianism and our agency in systems collapse.
Joel is the founder and Director of Future Minds Lab which applies neuroscience findings to art, AI, media, advertising and various philosophical quandaries. He’s also a National Health and Medical Research Council fellow and Professor of Cognitive Neuroscience at the University of New South Wales, Australia. He developed the first scientific test to measure intuition and wrote The Intuition Toolkit. In this conversation, we also cover the science of manifesting!
SHOW NOTES
I mention the chapter on Blame and the very robust discussion the Substack community had around it. You can join this here
Here’s the previous episode where Joel talks about the scientific proof of intuition