Daniel Dennett v. Robert Sapolsky - Do We Have Free Will?
Jan 24, 2024
auto_awesome
Philosopher Daniel Dennett and neurobiologist Robert Sapolsky debate whether human beings have free will. Sapolsky argues that free will is an illusion, while Dennett believes it is compatible with scientific knowledge. They discuss factors influencing decision-making, the role of biology and environment in shaping behavior, the link between free will and genetic attributes, responsibility, and the concept of being 'wired wrong' or 'wired right'.
Decisions and choices are influenced by biology, environment, and past experiences, challenging the notion of free will.
Self-control and the ability to be reasoned with are indications of free will, and education plays a vital role in developing self-control.
Relying on intuition can lead to unjust judgments and biases, but understanding the factors shaping behavior can lead to a fairer society.
Deep dives
Free will is argued to be a dangerous illusion
In this podcast episode, Daniel Dennett, a philosopher, and Robert Sapolsky, a biologist, engage in a debate about the existence of free will. Sapolsky argues that free will is an illusion, concluding that decisions and choices are influenced by biology, environment, and past experiences. He highlights the importance of understanding the numerous factors that shape individuals' behavior. Dennett, however, maintains that free will is real and essential for personal responsibility and self-control. He emphasizes the evolutionary development of self-control and the ability to make choices based on values and judgment. The audience showed a slight shift towards determinism after the debate.
Exploring the biological and environmental influences on decisions
Sapolsky explains that decisions are not independent of the complex web of biological and environmental influences. He discusses the impact of hormones, brain structure, genetics, childhood experiences, and fetal development on decision-making processes. Sapolsky argues that recognizing these influences and the lack of control over them challenges the notion of free will and the traditional concept of responsibility.
The role of education and self-control in a deterministic worldview
Dennett claims that self-control and the ability to be reasoned with are indications of free will. He highlights the importance of education in developing self-control to resist external influences and make responsible decisions. Sapolsky acknowledges the significance of education in understanding the influences on behavior but argues that responsibility should not be tied to the notion of free will. Instead, he focuses on creating a just society where prevention, rehabilitation, and support are prioritized.
Reevaluating intuition and the power of responsibility
The podcast explores how intuition can be misleading and flawed when thinking about free will. Dennett argues that embracing intuition can lead to unjust judgments and biases. Sapolsky emphasizes that relying on intuition is unreliable in understanding the complexities of behavior and human motivation. However, both Dennett and Sapolsky ultimately agree that responsibility and accountability are important social constructs and that a more informed understanding of the factors shaping behavior can lead to a fairer and more compassionate society.
The impact of a deterministic worldview on morality and action
The fear that adopting a deterministic worldview will lead to immoral actions is discussed. Sapolsky acknowledges that limited studies have shown a minor link between reduced belief in free will and increased unethical behavior. However, he emphasizes that individuals with a deterministic worldview can still exhibit ethical behavior. Dennett argues that the belief in free will inspires responsibility and moral action. Both agree on the need for education, understanding the roots of behavior, and creating a just society that protects individuals from harm.
For Stanford neurobiologist Robert Sapolsky, science clearly demonstrates that free will is a powerful and dangerous illusion. Without free will, it makes no more sense to punish people for antisocial behaviour than it does to scold a car for breaking down.
But for philosopher and cognitive scientist Daniel Dennett, free will is not only compatible with our current scientific knowledge but justified by it. Free will underwrites our moral and artistic responsibility – and reason and self-control are both real and desirable.
Coming together to debate this question for the first time, these two intellectual giants delve deep into the science and philosophy of the mind and get to the heart of this ancient and vitally important question.