The idea that we have free will is a cornerstone of society affecting
our justice system, politics, welfare, and more. After all,
to be found guilty of a crime one must have the ability to choose and do otherwise.
Research into the human mind is threatening to topple this notion, increasingly showing
that free will, in any sense of the term, can’t possibly be a good description of human behavior.
This video will serve as an overview of the psychology of determinism. It will
attempt to conclude if free will, meaning in the sense that one can choose otherwise,
or at minimum that one is able not to choose or act as one does, is just an illusion.
First, perhaps the study of genetics is the most important place to start when analyzing free will.
Genetics, a relatively new but rapidly growing field of scientific study, explores how
children inherit our eye color, hair, risk for disease, and more traits from parents.
In genetics, scientists trace packages of information called
genes that explain our unique characteristics.
It now appears genes are giving us more than basic traits like eye color.
Research is finding genes predispose us to things like mental health issues,
how long we age, our I.Q., how impulsive we are. Genes even contribute to day-to-day
choices we make, like which friends to hang out with or if we become religious.
That means if you are diagnosed with a life-altering condition
you can’t control, like schizophrenia, autism, or for that matter, psychopathy,
you had little to no say in that happening.
Now, you’ve probably heard scientists argue back that our environment and upbringing is
more responsible for the behavior or (nurture) for our actions than our genetics (or nature).
There’s an entirely new branch of science within genetics called epigenetics, which shows how
gene expressions can change throughout one’s life because of the environment one lives in.
However, the nature vs. nurture debate adds little
to the argument for free will. After all, on both accounts,
our actions and decisions are still greatly if not fully influenced by outside sources.
So, perhaps the decisions we can make are greatly shaped by forces outside of our control.
But we still consciously make the day-to-day decisions, right? Well,
studies into the neurology of the subconscious are indicating that might not be correct.
The most famous psychology of determinism experiment is the Libet experiment done in
the 1980s which many researchers today believe proved determinism correct.
Benjamin Libet asked subjects to randomly flick their wrist and found unconscious brain
activity leading up to the conscious decision to move. The study suggested that decisions are
made on a subconscious level first, the only later are translated into ‘conscious decision’.
Neuroscientists and researchers have criticized this experiment,
specifically Libet's interpretation of the ramping up of brain activity
and the participant’s ability to report the timing of the will.
But, newer studies have come out that have replicated the original finding
while addressing the original criticisms.
A 2008 study using modern brain scanning technology
predicted with 60% accuracy whether 12 subjects would press a button
with their left or right hand 10 seconds before they became aware of having made a choice.
Another study replicated the Libet experiment without relying on a subjective report
or will from subjects. The concluded a person's awareness cannot be the cause of movement,
and may instead only notice the movement.
Another 2011 study that used electrodes implanted deep in the subject’s brains
found that individual neurons fire 2 seconds before a “will” to act happened.
I’ll link to these studies below, plus there are many more coming out that seem to point
to this idea that our decisions happen before we are consciously aware of them.
Of course, some critics argue all these studies simply show some physical factors are involved in
making a decision. But, as put by researcher John-Dylan Haynes “ "How can I call a will
'mine' if I don't even know when it occurred and what it has decided to do?".
There’s also the fact that physical processes in the brain directly impact our behavior,
including moral decision-making.
Out of all my research into the psychology of determinism,
this following case study was the most shocking, at least to me.
Neurologists Russell Swerdlow and Jeffrey Burns detailed a
case study in a paper that showed an egg-sized brain tumor caused
sudden and uncontrollable pedophilia exhibited by a 40-year-old man.
This man, a school teacher, never had any interest in that subject until he suddenly
began visiting illegal websites and soliciting prostitutes with an inability to control himself.
It became so addictive he was thrown out of his home by his wife and faced jail time.
It was only when he began showing balance problems that doctors found the brain tumor
and after removal, all the desires and behaviors vanished.
The doctors concluded that there was no faking involved and this man’s morality was hijacked
by something in his brain he couldn’t control and had no say in its creation.
The science of the mind is not a perfect science of course. Still, mounting evidence-backed studies
throughout the last decades increasingly point to human behavior being fully deterministic.
This of course, is what we’d expect to find as it fits in line with the
theory of causal determinism, the idea that the state of the
universe right now determines what happens next regardless of our will.
As I went over in a previous video, causal determinism to not be true,
one would need to break the laws of nature or come up with a better theory
than physicalism, the most tested and science-backed theory in human history.
Logically, it makes sense that our world is deterministic and scientific studies
are help shedding light on how specifically how determinism is playing out in human behavior.
If you’re depressed after hearing this, just note these two important ideas.
First, just because causal determinism is true, doesn’t mean predetemrinism or the idea that
future events are predictable and we’re fated for one particular destiny. As far as we know, there
are still ways to change humanity’s future and our future, even if human behavior is deterministic.
Plus, despite everything covered in this video,
we may still have free will. This concept of free will is most likely not one we’re
traditionally used to, but a compatibilist one that fits with a deterministic world.
The idea in philosophy that free will exists alongside determinism is called compatibilism.
I’ll be taking a look soon and seeing if any modern compatibilist theories could make sense.
If you liked this video please give it a thumbs up.