"Free will" continues to be a hot topic in questions/comments w/many, many folk. my most-watched videos are on the subject. "Free will" is so heavily culturally, religiously, and advertising(ly) reinforced that it seems almost inconceivable that it could be a complete illusion. EVERYONE KNOWS we have free will, and we even feel it - it MUST be true.
Videos including "Predestination, control, free will and the illusion of time", "Everything is predetermined - Einstein and Ramana Maharshi" and "You Are Not In Control" and blogposts including "You say 'we have no free will' and 'we're not in control...' all discuss my take on free will. As there are still many questions (295 comments on these three vids), here are more insights and new science.
For decades, i KNEW that i had free will, and consciously "did" everything that happened, successes and failures, w/accompanying praise and blame. However, when the "I" fell away, there was no one there to have a will to be free. Still, life went on as it did before, even better. It was obvious that my choices and "doing" were responsible for nothing. It was surprisingly a liberating and empowering event.
What do we mean by "free will". Sam Harris's efforts ("Lying - Are "white lies" OK...?") and his controversial "Free Will" offer much clear reasoning. Sam has a Ph.D. in neuroscience and a Stanford degree. he has written and spoken, world-wide, on hard topics. His first book, "The End of Faith", won awards. His arguments on free will are in the video, "Sam Harris - Free Will" of his talk at the "Festival of Dangerous Ideas" in Sydney last year.
The popular conception of free will is that a) we could have behaved differently than we did, and b) we are the conscious source of our thoughts and actions in the present. Are these assumptions correct?
If we watch carefully what looks like acts we decided to do, actually arose spontaneously, w/o our being conscious of them. we cannot see their origin in our conscious minds, nor our decision to perform them. our "reason" for doing them only arises after the event, post-hoc. For 99+% of our day, actions occur "all by themselves", seamlessly, perfectly, w/o us.
If you watch your next thought, did you (pre)think it, or did it just manifest w/o your "knowledge" or "approval"? When you write/text something, did you "think up" what you were writing before it appeared, or did it just appear almost magically from "nowhere"?
Looking at the simple act of my apparent choosing which green tea to drink, it is obvious that the apparent choice is not mine, not reasoned, nor premeditated. i watch my hand reaching for the Jasmine rather than Zen or Ginger, but i can feel no "reason" for the selection. Jasmine just "feels" like the right one.
Where/why did that feeling arise? What was the rationale? After the selection, if asked, a "reason", post-hoc, emerges. "i had Zen this morning, and was almost out of Ginger which i like best, so Jasmine was the obvious choice". This "reason" is a story constructed by the ego/I to make it appear like the choice was made consciously and logically.
The ego/I does that. It knows that it was not involved in the choice, but to keep the "free will" illusion going, a key part of the its job description, it fills in the blanks.
Even if i had seemingly, consciously, "decided" to pick Jasmine, the specific thoughts that had manifested to make that decision, and the weighting and balancing of their importance, and which ones were remembered, overlooked, or didn't arise, would have just manifested spontaneously, unchosen.
The cognitive neuroscience demonstrating that free will is an illusion continues to emerge. It is compelling. Benjamin Libet, et al.'s, ground-breaking, paradigm-shattering, paper in Brain in 1983; "Time of Conscious Intention To Act in Relation to Onset of Cerebral Activity: The Unconscious Initiation of a Freely Voluntary Act", proved that the motor cortex initiates actions well before the "I" is even told about it, and well in advance of the actions being performed. ("You say 'we have no free will', and 'we're not in control'...") If we aren't even aware when, or what, action is initiated, how can we be in control and have free will?
Libet's work, which ultimately received the inaugural "Virtual Nobel Prize in Psychology", caused a firestorm of hostile reactions from many sides, including other scientists. Nonetheless, in the intervening decades, w/much more sophisticated technology, measuring equipment and experimental designs, his work stands.
What about our retributive justice system if there is no free will, no personal responsibility? If "what we are" is determined by our genetics, parents, where/when we were born, religion, friends, etc. which were not of our choosing, how do we deal with criminal acts, and everyday socio-moralistic interactions?
This is a critical question w/many implications. Integrating this scientifically-demonstrated fact into our religions, institutions, personal life, government, legal system, health care, etc. is going to be disruptive.
Some scientists and ethicists have argued "Wouldn't it be better if we just don't tell them about it?"
IMHO, it is like continuing to tell folk that the world is flat, or the center of the universe (like the Catholic Church did for centuries). In the end, "truth will out".
we are already seeing these arguments appear in the criminal legal system. The article, "Criminal Minds: Use of Neuroscience as a Defense Skyrockets" cites Nita Farahany of Duke as saying that cases in which judges have cited neuroscience evidence in their opinions increased from 112 in 2007 to over 1500 in 2011.
Justice will ultimately require incorporation of this understanding. Are we ready for it?
BTW, due to the stellar efforts of Suzanne Winters, the website @ www.happiness-beyond-thought.com has been updated and five articles that i wrote for two Indian quarterly publications are linked from the "About" page:
Videos including "Predestination, control, free will and the illusion of time", "Everything is predetermined - Einstein and Ramana Maharshi" and "You Are Not In Control" and blogposts including "You say 'we have no free will' and 'we're not in control...' all discuss my take on free will. As there are still many questions (295 comments on these three vids), here are more insights and new science.
For decades, i KNEW that i had free will, and consciously "did" everything that happened, successes and failures, w/accompanying praise and blame. However, when the "I" fell away, there was no one there to have a will to be free. Still, life went on as it did before, even better. It was obvious that my choices and "doing" were responsible for nothing. It was surprisingly a liberating and empowering event.
 |
| Sam Harris |
The popular conception of free will is that a) we could have behaved differently than we did, and b) we are the conscious source of our thoughts and actions in the present. Are these assumptions correct?
If we watch carefully what looks like acts we decided to do, actually arose spontaneously, w/o our being conscious of them. we cannot see their origin in our conscious minds, nor our decision to perform them. our "reason" for doing them only arises after the event, post-hoc. For 99+% of our day, actions occur "all by themselves", seamlessly, perfectly, w/o us.
If you watch your next thought, did you (pre)think it, or did it just manifest w/o your "knowledge" or "approval"? When you write/text something, did you "think up" what you were writing before it appeared, or did it just appear almost magically from "nowhere"?
Looking at the simple act of my apparent choosing which green tea to drink, it is obvious that the apparent choice is not mine, not reasoned, nor premeditated. i watch my hand reaching for the Jasmine rather than Zen or Ginger, but i can feel no "reason" for the selection. Jasmine just "feels" like the right one.
Where/why did that feeling arise? What was the rationale? After the selection, if asked, a "reason", post-hoc, emerges. "i had Zen this morning, and was almost out of Ginger which i like best, so Jasmine was the obvious choice". This "reason" is a story constructed by the ego/I to make it appear like the choice was made consciously and logically.
The ego/I does that. It knows that it was not involved in the choice, but to keep the "free will" illusion going, a key part of the its job description, it fills in the blanks.
Even if i had seemingly, consciously, "decided" to pick Jasmine, the specific thoughts that had manifested to make that decision, and the weighting and balancing of their importance, and which ones were remembered, overlooked, or didn't arise, would have just manifested spontaneously, unchosen.
The cognitive neuroscience demonstrating that free will is an illusion continues to emerge. It is compelling. Benjamin Libet, et al.'s, ground-breaking, paradigm-shattering, paper in Brain in 1983; "Time of Conscious Intention To Act in Relation to Onset of Cerebral Activity: The Unconscious Initiation of a Freely Voluntary Act", proved that the motor cortex initiates actions well before the "I" is even told about it, and well in advance of the actions being performed. ("You say 'we have no free will', and 'we're not in control'...") If we aren't even aware when, or what, action is initiated, how can we be in control and have free will?
 |
| Benjamin Libet |
Libet's work, which ultimately received the inaugural "Virtual Nobel Prize in Psychology", caused a firestorm of hostile reactions from many sides, including other scientists. Nonetheless, in the intervening decades, w/much more sophisticated technology, measuring equipment and experimental designs, his work stands.
Libet himself tried to "save" free will by arguing that when the brain was informed that the action was in process, it could have stopped the action. However, that doesn't change the discussion. The thought/intention to stop the action would also arise, in the same way the initial action did, out of knowledge or conscious control.
There was a fascinating BBC video, "Neuroscience and Free Will", that demonstrated how convincing the contemporary "no free will" science is, but BBC removed it on copyright grounds. The research was done by J. D. Haynes, "Decoding and Predicting Intentions", @ the Bernstein Center in Berlin in 2011. Haynes' work demonstrated that it was possible to predict intentions, with an fMRI, 7 to 10 seconds before the decision was actually made.
 |
| J. D. Haynes Bernstein Center Berlin |
Also, Fried, et al. in "Internally Generated Preactivation of Single Neurons in Human Medial Frontal Cortex Predicts Volition" in 2011 demonstrated that direct recordings from only 256 neurons could predict w/80% accuracy a decision to move 0.7 seconds before (s)he even became aware of it. The "recruitment" of neurons (assembling a project team) occurred 1.5 seconds before subjects reported making the decision to move.
The research is conclusive; the brain determines what you will do, well before you are aware that you will do it. What does your "free will" mean? we no more initiate events "consciously", than we cause our hearts to beat, or our stomach to digest our lunch. What will my next mental state, thought, decision, or action be? i do not know...it just happens, somehow, "all by itself".
What would it take to actually have free will? Harris answers, "You would need to be aware of all the factors that determine your thoughts and actions, and you would need to have complete control over those factors...What would influence the influences?...You are not controlling the storm and you are not lost in it. You are the storm."
One typical response folk offer is that if there is no free will, "Why should i do anything?". This is the "Lazy Argument" and it confuses determinism w/fatalism. The simple flaw is that if you are
predetermined to do nothing, you will do nothing; if not, you will do
something, whatever it is."
 |
| Ramana Maharshi |
Ramana Maharshi echoed this:
The feeling ‘I work’ is a hindrance. Ask yourself ‘Who works?’...Then the work will not bind you, it will go on automatically. Make no effort either to work or to renounce; it is your effort which is the bondage.
What is destined to happen will happen. If you are destined not to work, work cannot be had even if you hunt for it. If you are destined to work, you will not be able to avoid it and you will be forced to engage yourself in it.
So, leave it to the higher power; you cannot renounce or retain as you choose.
What is destined to happen will happen. If you are destined not to work, work cannot be had even if you hunt for it. If you are destined to work, you will not be able to avoid it and you will be forced to engage yourself in it.
So, leave it to the higher power; you cannot renounce or retain as you choose.
This is a critical question w/many implications. Integrating this scientifically-demonstrated fact into our religions, institutions, personal life, government, legal system, health care, etc. is going to be disruptive.
Some scientists and ethicists have argued "Wouldn't it be better if we just don't tell them about it?"
IMHO, it is like continuing to tell folk that the world is flat, or the center of the universe (like the Catholic Church did for centuries). In the end, "truth will out".
we are already seeing these arguments appear in the criminal legal system. The article, "Criminal Minds: Use of Neuroscience as a Defense Skyrockets" cites Nita Farahany of Duke as saying that cases in which judges have cited neuroscience evidence in their opinions increased from 112 in 2007 to over 1500 in 2011.
Justice will ultimately require incorporation of this understanding. Are we ready for it?
BTW, due to the stellar efforts of Suzanne Winters, the website @ www.happiness-beyond-thought.com has been updated and five articles that i wrote for two Indian quarterly publications are linked from the "About" page:
- The Mountain Path, April – Jun, 2008, “Using Sri Ramana Maharshi’s Teachings in Yoga Practices”
- The Mountain Path, Jan – Mar 2010, “Everything Is Predetermined – Is That Scientifically Possible?”
- The Direct Path, July – August 2010, “Living Beyond Thought”
- The Mountain Path, Oct – Dec 2011, “Where Does This ‘I’ Arise?”
- The Mountain Path, Jan-Mar, 2013, “Non-dual Meditation and Self-Inquiry”
Freedom from the burden of choice is liberation.
ReplyDeleteHi Roy.
DeleteTotally agree.
It is amazing how directly freedom from the illusion/burden of believing you have free will and are in control liberates one from the egoic/doer structure. With it goes the illusion of good deeds and bad deeds.
Instead of "life" continuing to be a terrifying place believing one is in control, one discovers that life with the understanding that free will is a delusion, is easy, sweet and liberated and so much "safer" than before.
stillness
Sir,
ReplyDeleteYou seem to have argued that your meditations have destroyed your capability for free will. I think that is mistaken -- but simply put, it's not (yet?) possible to dispute the self-reporting of mental states. So, three possibilities exist: a) The "free will is an illusion" people are mistaken, b) The "free will is not an illusion" people are mistaken, or c) Some human minds have free will, and some don't.
if (c) is correct, how should those of us with free will treat these unfortunately brothers and sisters, who are unable to make decisions for themselves?
And if you perceive that this is a koan -- good insight. ;P
Hi Vallor.
DeleteThat's not what i've "argued". As i said in the post, with the deconstruction of the "I", it was obvious that i never had free will as there was no one to have it, nor was there free will before - i just believed there was.
The big surprise, and i had been a fervent believer in free will, was that my life went on as before, even better, w/o the belief that i had a free will and had any control over what happened immediately or its ultimate result.
Your c) is a logical impossibility. How in our massively-interconnected network of today's gobal society could there be some population that had free will and others that didn't? Just how would that operate?
Everyone would have to wait around for those w/free will to make a decision before they knew what to do. As the smallest decision in south India could ultimately impact some seemingly unrelated activity in France or Brazil (Complex Systems Theory), how would that work?
It isn't a question of only certain folk being "unable to make decisions for themselves". The neuroscience demonstrates that none of us can make meaningful decisions on the outcomes of our actions.
Another way to look at it, using Complex Systems understanding, is that we have no idea what the outcome is of any of our actions as the results of those actions work their forward through time impacting countless unknown others in unknown ways.
Even if we had "free will", which our science has demonstrated we don't, we have no way to know or even project what the outcomes of our actions will be. How can we believe we have meaningful "control"? And over what?
stillness
This was solved definitively for hundreds of years by every middle school youth who bothered to think carefully.
ReplyDeleteHi Nate.
DeleteAbsolutely agree. i was amazed, once i started to look carefully, and as i have worked w/others, how obvious it is. Where do our thoughts come from? Do i think up my thoughts, or what i say, "ahead of time"?
Or as i frequently ask others, if you believe you have free will and are "in control", how's that working out for you? If it isn't working out, why do you still believe that it's true?
i believe most folk know, really know, at some level, that it's not working and they have no free will or control, but are just terrified to face the possibility and admit it. That's why there is such forceful "push back".
If "free will" was obviously true, and certain, and really worked, folk would just laugh the whole thing off. They don't. It makes them angry. Why is that?
stillness
If u have received good cards in this life, believing in absence of free will or presence of destiny is considered being modest, otherwise a person with bad cards talking about destiny is considered equivalent to the fox crying sour grapes.
ReplyDeleteDear Dr. Weber,
ReplyDeleteI would like to express my sincere thanks to you for providing such an spiritually insightful blog and your youtube lectures are simply outstanding!
I have personally experienced (since at least intellectually realizing that all events are predetermined and working to consciously integrate predeterminism into my moment to moment stream of thoughts) that I have become very complacent in my everyday life.
Upon realizing that every action I take has enormous and unpredictable repercussions, I have become more risk-averse. I have been spending a greater amount time staying at the house. I have become less communicative with my partner, family and friends, out of fear that I will not be able to predict and determine what I will say, and my autonomic and spontaneous utterances may inadvertently hurt those I love.
Of course, I am determined to behave this way as the result of prior mental and environmental states. I cannot predict and control what I will think, say or do for the remainder of my existence. I am just a biological automaton who will exhibit automatic responses to internal and external inputs.
This knowledge has created a sense of helplessness and fear, that though I may personally not be responsible for what I do, the world will still hold me accountable for what I do, and that I may be reproached and penalized for the mistakes and blunders I may make in the future.
Please pardon me if I have wasted your time and I welcome any insights you could provide to help me.
Sincerely,
Hi Anonymous.
ReplyDeleteRealize that this new understanding that you have no free will, and no ability to predict all of the results of your actions on countless others, is not a new situation...it has always been that way, only now you have a correct understanding of it.
These actions that have manifested of (perceived) changes in your actions and communication w/others are also not in your control; they will either stay that way or they will change to some other actions.
The most important thing to remember is that there are stories behind these changes, and they are generated by the I/ego that was at the root of the illusion of "free will" or "control". If you just ask simply, "Are these stories true?", "How do i feel when i have these stories in consciousness?", "Could i let go of these stories?", "Are these stories helpful?" (See blogpost "Surrendering the 'I', letting go of suffering" for more details).
The ego/I phantom/avatar will create all sorts of stories, doubts, concerns, and problems w/this new understanding of "no free will". Its very survival is dependent on maintaining this illusion. Inquire into "Who/what it is that has these concerns?", "What is afraid of hurting (or helping) others?", "Where is this one that believed it was in control before, but was clearly wrong about that?".
you will find, as Ramana Maharshi has said, "What is destined to happen will happen. If you are destined not to work, work cannot be had even if you hunt for it. If you are destined to work, you will not be able to avoid it and you will be forced to engage yourself in it. So, leave it to the higher power; you cannot renounce or retain as you choose."
The same applies to your communication w/others, or your perceived decision to be or to not be active, you cannot renounce or retain as you choose.
Trust this is helpful.
stillness
I was predestined to leave this comment.
ReplyDeleteYes, indeed you were and the fascinating part of it is that you have no idea what the outcome of this seemingly simple action will be and who will be impacted by it as it works its way forward through "time" and "space".
ReplyDeleteSomeone reading your comment will have their life changed by the few seconds they take to read it, even if they reject the premise entirely. They may find it is the critical element that they have been waiting for and it may change their life entirely, or not. What they say to others may change them, positively, negatively or not, etc.
That is why it is so obviously out of our control and ability to predict.
stillness
I find this topic fascinating! Could you tell me how this research would apply to long-term planning? Such as, I just got back from a vacation. We planned everything out, fleshed out the schedule, and made hotel reservations. We then went on the trip (and had a great time!). It seems as if we made the plans well in advance and then were determined to carry them out. I know that in the moment, we could have spontaneously decided not to board the plane or not to go to a certain museum, but what about the overall vacation that we went on?
ReplyDeleteAlso, what about buying a house or planning a new business venture or even planning something like a wedding?
How does planning come into play?
Thank you for your time. I heard your interview on C-Realm. Very thought provoking.
Hi Anonymous. you will continue to do "long-term planning"...How else can you make plane or hotel reservations and schedule all of the events you want to attend? you can't just show up at the airport, or hotel and be certain that you can get a flight/room, etc. you can even make up "to do" lists for every day, and plan new business initiatives, or even start-ups.
DeleteHowever, realize that none of it may take place, or a totally different agenda may manifest, and that all of this is out of your control. If you had gotten to the airport, and a "mechanical problem" or "weather" several states away has delayed your plane, then your entire vacation is changed, "out of your control".
i spent years working w/folk in start-ups and i never saw an original business plan that didn't change; everyone, including the investors, knew it would change, but it was a place to start. It was acknowledged by all concerned that it was "out of their control". Markets change, customers change, competitors change, the over-all investment and economy changes, technology changes, etc. so the plan is changed completely "out of your control".
i can recall in one meeting chiding our CEO (gently), on our using the economic forecast to feed into our business planning, since it was always wrong, always. He said "Well, we have to use something, even if it's always wrong."
Planning is useful...it's just important to recognize up front that that isn't what's going to manifest, that it's not your fault, and you need to be flexible at adapting to the reality.
Trust this is useful.
stillness
Thank you so much for the response. It really helps to clear things up. After reading your response, I started thinking about how much I relate to this since I am an artist. Generally, the idea I have at the beginning of a project is very different then the end result. Neither outcome is better or worse, just different. While I am making creative decisions in the moment, it is somewhat automatic. If I relate this to the way a person lives his/her life, then it makes a lot of sense. Thank you for the insight!
ReplyDeleteGreat that you found it useful. As you may have heard, i "backed into" the "no free will" understanding. i was very deterministic until my self-referential thoughts stopped, and the "I" fell away. Then it was obvious there was no one to be in control, or to have "free will", nor had there ever been.
DeleteInstead of being a dreaded, chaotic, troubled, space, i found that understanding to be one of the most freeing, enabling, and beautiful things that ever happened. All of my "sins", "regrets", "failures", etc. fell away, as did my "achievements", "accomplishments", etc. (which were even more disempowering that my failures) and i was just left in "now, now, now", fully present for whatever arose.
It is such a magnificent way to live.
stillness
Hello Gary.
ReplyDeleteThanks for this blog and your two books, they are helping me a lot with my daily practice and to understand many things.
After reading few times many of your post, I don’t fully understand one thing, and I think I’m missing something. Regarding to “free will”, I understand that the “I/ego” doesn’t do anything (no choices), that She/Universal Consciousness does it. Ramana says that everything is predetermined, even smaller things; so when a person is going born and die, which experiences is going to have and what people is going to meet is already predetermined, and that our only choice is whether to identify with the screen or the movie (but even that is not our choice).
My multiple-question is: can the I/ego do something, are these self-referential thoughts or DMN/blah,blah network as well predetermined, or can we choose to work in stopping these self-referential thoughts? When I’m working with self-enquiry to stop these self-referential thoughts (I/ego), who is doing it, She/Universal Consciousness or the ego?
I used to think that this I/ego (blah blah network) is the only thing that have some kind of “free will” (just to think, not to do), and depending of your progress in surrender this I/ego, She/Universal Consciousness will arrange things to show you “the way”. But I’m not sure anymore.
José.
Hi Jose,
DeletePredetermination doesn't mean, in my experience, that the Universal Consciousness put something in place long ago, that is working its way forward, like a giant clock to carry out events.
What is more likely, is that since everything is changing and evolving constantly, that the Universal Consciousness is also evolving and learning constantly through us, as She also has to evolve to survive. There is much good research now on galaxies disappearing into black holes and other new ones being created out of the "bottoms" of black holes.
As this process goes on moment-to-moment, whatever the ego/I is doing is part of that, at least as long as it exists. If the ego/I continues to identify with the movie/screen, which is out of its control, it will remain and suffering will continue as part of the Universal Consciousness' evolutionary, learning process.
Whether or not, when, and if the energy/motivation arises to deconstruct the ego/I is not under it's own control. It can't be because if the ego/I had "free will", it would never decide to deconstruct itself, as it likes the current arrangement just fine.
stillness
Thanks for your response, Gary.
ReplyDeleteI understand this issue much better.
José.
Hi Jose,
DeleteGreat that it was helpful for you.
stillness
gary
Dear Gary
ReplyDeleteThanks for your very lucid article, I enjoyed reading it and Sam’s book on Free Will. While I can’t fault any of the logic presented I do think there are unanswered questions, ultimately connecting to the “hard problem” of consciousness. Hopefully you’ll see what I mean…
Basically, if all this is an illusion, then we have to explain WHY we have this illusion in the first place. There are a few surface level explanations that spring to mind.
1) We predict others actions based on the past and the future. When we base explanations on the future we assume people have goals/purpose. Behaviours deliberately directed toward goals have the feeling of being free or choice driven. “I want a new car so I’m going to choose to do xyz”. When we based explanations on the past or conditions then they don’t have that flavour. In the “bottom up” explanation everything is just an evolving chemical soup obeying the laws of physics. A leads to B leads to C. In most every day social situations the explanation involving the goal-directed behaviour is more efficient and less clunky. Predicting others accurately and efficiently obviously has fitness advantages. We then apply that same process of explanation to our own actions.
2) Even if our narrative explanations are post-hoc, you could argue they influence future behaviour by cycling back into unconscious conditions for the next time. E.g. If I smoke a cigarette, then consciously really regret the “choice”, that regret might alter my neurology such that I don’t smoke next time. I may never have had a real choice about whether to smoke or not, but the belief that I did made me feel a certain way that did influence future behaviour. There’s still no free will, but the post-hoc narrative is doing something.
3) Blame and praise. The things we think we have a choice about are behaviours responsive to blame and praise. There’s no point blaming my gut for rumbling because doing so won’t change the noises it makes. But blame and shame me for e.g. undressing in public, and I’ll be much less likely to do this again. Again, none of it is free, but it helps explain why the illusion might be there – the illusion is basically an evolutionary short hand that confers fitness via our ability to change behaviour by how we interact with others and ourselves.
However, none of these are deep explanations, they don’t get to why the post-hoc narrative has to occur in consciousness in the first place. If our choices unfold seamlessly from unconscious processes how, and why, do they eventually enter the light? This is pretty much the “hard problem” of consciousness, the “why couldn’t it all go in in the dark?” question. What’s special about qualia, or felt experiences, and why do we have them?
I would argue that the sensation of being conscious is bound up with the sensation of being a free actor which is one reason the illusion feels so sticky. We feel like we’re “present”, in a space that’s neither past nor future in which we can dictate movement. In fact, everything we’re conscious of has already happened and takes place in a form of selective, high-fidelity, short-term memory.
I realise some of this is a little confused, but I hope you can see some of what I’m getting at here. Even if you are able to carry on without a sense of “I” and without the illusion of “Free will”, nevertheless you carry on with the sensation of being conscious. Why be conscious, what purpose does it solve? This question can’t be answered in terms of an evolutionary trick because the substance of the trick, experience itself, cannot be disputed. To me this feels like it’s ultimately part of the same question.
Hi Anonymous,
DeleteThere seem to be two different things mixed together in your analysis, i.e. a) why are we conscious? and b) why do we have free will?.
The question on why we are conscious is a great philosophical one, but it would be more usefully reframed as "why are we conscious of being conscious?", i.e. why are we "self conscious". Is your pet conscious? As far as we can ascertain, they are conscious, but as far as we can ascertain they, and few/almost no other species is "self conscious".
"Self consciousness" probably did come along with symbolic logic, a constructed language, internal narrative and free will about 75,000 to 80,000 yrs ago. we had done just fine since we split off from the chimpanzees about 6,000,000 yrs ago, so none of these were necessary for our functioning.
However, when we developed them, as our numbers increased and we needed to assign different functional tasks to large numbers of folk, we found we had an enormous advantage over every other species and quickly wiped our the other four "homo" species in existence and anything else we chose to terrorize and swept the planet.
The entire package hence conveyed great evolutionary fitness advantages. All of these attributes enabled us to fit into increasingly larger hierarchies and co-operate through new programs like reciprocal altruism, "free will", and subject/doing/object language.
IMHO, a key reason free will "seemed like a good idea at the time" was that it gave us the illusion that we, and others, were in control so we would develop guilt for "bad behaviors" that didn't support the integrity of the hierarchy and got us tossed out of the cave.
It really didn't change our behaviors, as anyone who has fully understood that is an illusion will tell you, as you behave as you have always behaved, only w/o the guilt and w/o the blaming of others.
i haven't seen that the "free will" program has any positive effect on stopping any addictive habits, like smoking, porn, alcohol, social media, gambling, etc. If it did, we wouldn't have any problem dropping them. If anything, it only creates guilt that we haven't been able to stop, which feeds the monster.
An interesting discussion, but the most important thing is to recognize that realizing that we don't have control, or free will, or anyone to have them, is just how much easier, and more "full of wonder" your life becomes.
stillness
Thanks for your reply, Gary.
DeleteThe "self-consciousness" connection with symbolic logic is very interesting.
I get that we might need something like language to represent ourself to ourselves, and especially to communicate the fact of that representation. Nevertheless, as a matter of introspection, it seems one can be aware of awareness in a silent mind. Also, language seems to be the very thing that betwiches us - that leads us to thinking we are our thoughts, to getting stuck in separation between subject and objected, and so on. If language is the thing that traps us, how could it also be the thing that liberated us, when it evolved? I assume here that being "liberated" requires a degree of self-consciousness, rather than just consciousness, but I think it's very easy (for me) to get confused here. Should we talk about self-self-consciousness, and on and on (infinite regress problem)? Is consciousness inherently aware of itself? Also how does language do what it does without being perceived by something? Is language itself able to be consciouss (cf. Hofstader's "Strange Loops")? Is language a good paradigm to understand the universe itself, i.e. is information what is fundamental (cf. Wheeler's "It from Bit"). Going back to the idea of self-awareness in a silent mind, it seems we can be bewitched by language even when not explicitly aware of self-talk actively occuring. For example, I may get depressed by some story on the news, then carry on my day and have it leave my active consciousness, but nevertheless the "belief", or "thought" or whatever that, say, not enough is being done about global warming, might cast a subtle shadow over my day.
Once again some rambles and some confusions. Please feel free to respond or not as pleases you. I know there are often no real answers to these questions but I can't resist bouncing them off someone who has seen deeply into such matters.
Regards,
Arthur
Hi Arthur,
DeleteFollowing on the "Is your pet conscious?" discussion, your pet or virtually any other species is "conscious" as it is different from a rock by virtue of its behavioral functioning in response to its environment. A rock can't do that.
However, as pointed out earlier, it isn't "self conscious", as near as we can ascertain, as it doesn't have a "self" to be conscious, i.e. consciousness is just there without any perceived "agent" to wonder about it. Our species was likely that way until we developed symbolic logic in the last roughly 1% of our evolutionary time since we split off from chimpanzees.
Symbolic logic and the evolution of the self/I logically occurred before language manifested, but language would follow fairly easily as we watched the birds do it, as they had done it for about 250 million years.
IME, what happens experientially, is to inquire into what it is that is "self-aware", and nothing is found, i.e. there is no self aware of self, there is just awareness/consciousness. As this inquiry continues, the watcher, which is the self, eventually disappears and there is just awareness/consciousness with no one to be aware of it.
So, you ask, as far as "self-awareness in a silent mind", then who reports back on the "pure awareness/consciousness" if there's no one there. If you are residing in that "pure awareness/consciousness", there is obviously only "now, now, now" and no self/I to record it, so it can't be reported, except "after the fact". we just assume that it hasn't changed from what we couldn't report.
If you have truly deconstructed the ego/I/self, then there is no getting depressed by the news, global warming, etc., and no self-talk occurring, implicit or explicit. The stories that are underneath the concern about those issues are what give rise to your feelings and they all contain an ego/I/self that has stored them for future worry and fearing.
It's all about the ego/I/self. If it is not there, then the worries, fears, desires, etc. fall away, and there is just pure consciousness/awareness with no one to observe it.
Trust this is useful.
stillness
Hello Gary,
ReplyDeleteBeen studying your work since the beginning of the pandemic. My troubled mind, past mistakes and curiosity about the future is what made me discover you and become intrigued with your work. All the thoughts in my head the ones that determine my future? My mind tells me will happen to me and and what won’t. What are your thoughts and opinions on this Dr. Weber?
Your pupil,
Collin
Hi Collin,
DeleteAs this article describes, everything is predetermined, so you can let go of the thoughts in your head, as they are meaningless, and only cause confusion and fear.
If you inquire into "What/when/where is the Collin has these thoughts?" any time you feel troubled, you will see them weaken.
you can also ask "Are these thoughts true?", "Can I be sure they are true?", "How do I feel when I have them?", "How would I feel without them?", and "Is it just as likely they are totally wrong?". This will show you what impostors they are.
stillness