Treacle Worshipper

I am not a philosopher, but I am looking for some philosophical help with the question of free will.
I believe that we do not have free will, because it seems obvious to me that we are formed through our genes and our environment. We have no control over this, and therefore have no control over our reactions/decisions, because they would be different if our environment had been different.
However, I think we have the illusion of freewill, and would go mad if we thought we didn't have free will. Therefore, we act as though we have free will.
What I would like is:
comments on the above, both positive and negative
people's explanations for why they hold a similar or different view
comments on how I can get to be more clear-thinking about this
comments on why we have the illusion of freewill, if it is an illusion

I want to approach this from a secular point of view, so I would appreciate it if people refrained from posting with a theistic worldview. Thanks.

I will probably only contribute to ask for clarification, as I really don't feel that I know enough about the subject to discuss it well.

Mods, if you feel this should be somewhere else, please move it.
Thanks again,
TW

Warwick

You can make choices that will result in the change to your environment. You also have the option of making an irrational choice.

EggplantTrent

Define free will.

EggplantTrent

yaktldg

warwick: You can make choices that will result in the change to your environment. You also have the option of making an irrational choice.

Aren't thinking of and deciding between choices a matter left to chance (genes, environment), not "free will"?

That is, you may think about the choice of changing your environment, and you may decide to change it; but these possibilities seem to be left to chance or whatever, but not "free will".

yaktldg

EggplantTrent: Define free will.

I don't think TW means the capability to choose, as Warwick alluded to; but, rather, some supernatural capability, I suppose. I'm not sure of a good definition.

Warwick

Main Entry: free will
Function: noun
Date: 13th century
1 : voluntary choice or decision <I do this of my own free will>
2 : freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention

beastmaster

Treacle, I more or less agree with you.

I think there is no conscious free will. There may be some "free" thinking at the subconscious or quantum-mind level, but it is truly free (i.e., you can't control it).

The illusion of conscious intent is fabricated as (or shortly after) our mind has already been made up.

What is the purpose of the illusion of "conscious intent"?

I believe that the conscious mind assists the non-conscious by storing, filing, and accessing certain "rules of engagement" (e.g., ethics, etiquette, morality, etc.)

Most decisions take place on the non-conscious level and never get kicked up to the conscious mind. This is necessary to enable quick thinking and conserve mental resources.

Sometimes, the non-conscious needs help finding a rule or is in an unfamiliar situation and asks the conscious mind to help access the appropriate rule. At this point, the conscious mind has the sensation that it is making a decision. In reality, it is merely searching its memory files for an appropriate decision rule.

If it comes up blank, then the conscious sends a "404 File Not Found" message back to the non-conscious.

The non-conscious comes up with a new "rule" and sends it up to the conscious mind.

The conscious mind declares the new rule as its "intention."

The illusion of intent is necessary to create a memory of the newly understood rule (like a memo-to-self) and a neural pathway, so the conscious mind knows where to find the new rule and has a memory of how to apply it.

I don't think the conscious mind is free to make up its own rules. I think it's bound by the rules created by the non-conscious mind.

Does this make sense? For me, the conscious mind is a secretary, not a boss.

Treacle Worshipper

Originally posted by Warwick
You can make choices that will result in the change to your environment.
However, whichever choice you make will have been predetermined by genes & environment. Eg. I may decide to kiss a girl. That decision is based on my attraction to the girl. My attraction is based (ultimately) on the hormone levels in my mother's womb when I was gestating. (Or at least I believe that is the current favoured theory as regards attraction.) Hence genes. There will also be certain environmental factors working, eg, do I feel this is a safe place to kiss another woman? Has she shown signs of attraction to me? Things which I have learnt, hence, environment.

You also have the option of making an irrational choice.
Do you mean an irrational choice in the sense that we don't think about it in our conscious mind? I think that most of our choices are made like that. I also think that, because we are at the mercy of g&e, all our choices are irrational. Even if we base them on logic, that is because we were taught logic - it has become a part of our environment.

Main Entry: free will
Function: noun
Date: 13th century
1 : voluntary choice or decision <I do this of my own free will>
2 : freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention
Thanks for finding the definition, Warwick. In regard to this, my point is that choice is not voluntary, because it is "determined by prior causes", those causes being genes & the environment. (I think the dictionary probably means "voluntary" as in "someone is not holding a gun to your head".)

Quote beastmaster:
Does this make sense? For me, the conscious mind is a secretary, not a boss.
It makes sense to me. Do you know of any scientific studies that have been done into this idea? I vaguely remember hearing of one that showed that messages are sent to our limbs before we have consciously thought to move them, altho' I am more interested in mental processes than physical ones at the moment. I guess the only way you can scientifically study things like this is through physical movements, tho'.
TW

Warwick

I believe the above factors would influence a range of choices in which you would choose an action (or actions) that is in your own perceived best interest.

Neilium

TW,

How exactly would a scientist tell exactly when someone consciously thinks something? Check out Daniel Dennett's book Consciousness Explained. In it, he discusses the problems of such experiments, and the problems of finding some physical threshold where a stimulus enters consciousness (basically, there isn't one, according to Dennett).

Mental processes are physical processes.

If this were the case, identical twins raised in the same family would make identical decisions all the time (same genes, same environment). They would even speak in unison all the time. How creepy would that be?

There's no question that genes and environment shape your consciousness. Without those shaping forces, there would be no "you" to make any decisions at all. Control of the self does not evaporate simply because the self was formed by means outside the self's control.

The sum total of my envrionment, my genetic makeup, my experiences is my consiousness, my will: ME. They affect the decisions I make, because if they didn't, it wouldn't be me making the decisions. Decisions made outside of the self would be irrational and incomprehensible.

There's a lot of great stuff in this thread, and I find the question fascinating. So I look forward to any and all responses.

-Neil