From: lexfridman
Introduction
The discussion on free will and determinism revolves around the age-old question of whether humans possess the freedom to make choices unaffected by past events or if every decision is predetermined by existing causes. In a conversation with Sam Harris, known for his critical examination of free will, various dimensions of this philosophical debate were explored.
The Illusion of Free Will
Sam Harris argues that not only is free will an illusion, but so is the illusion of free will itself [52:05]. This statement suggests a deeper level of non-existence, where even the assumed personal experience of exercising free will isn’t truly there. Harris asserts that our thoughts and intentions arise in a manner that is fully compatible with the lack of free will.
Sam Harris
“You don’t know what you’re going to think next, and you can’t help but think it” [24:50].
The implications of this understanding challenge the conventional belief that states improvisation in thought and action. Even when one deliberately contemplates options, the final decision simply emerges, seemingly of its own accord, as if external forces were scripting it [56:43].
The Problem of Causation
An underlying element of determinism is causation. Everything that happens and every decision made is the result of previous causes. Harris notes that even the sensation of willingly making a choice is enveloped in layers of causative factors stemming from one’s genetics and environmental influences, of which the individual is neither the author nor controller [10:26].
He explains, “If you rewound time to a previous moment, everything would unfold the same way” [22:28]. This viewpoint powerfully emphasizes the deterministic framework whereby even our belief in having made a different choice is nothing more than an illusion of greater agency.
Consciousness and Self
The discourse further explores the intricate relationship between consciousness and self in the realm of free will. While consciousness forms the backdrop of our experiences, it seems to work independently of a self that authors thoughts [23:55]. Harris points out that detecting a separation of self and consciousness, meditation can dissolve the illusion of self and, consequently, the illusion of possessing free will [12:54].
Free Will in Society and Individual Implications
Understanding free will as an illusion offers potential benefits in the realms of compassion and hatred. Harris suggests that recognizing the absence of free will can reduce hatred by framing negative actions as functions of predetermined causes rather than intentional malevolence [57:48].
Perspective Shift
Letting go of the conviction of free will can lead to greater empathy and diminish the psychological basis for hatred. This perspective might offer a shortcut toward compassion, fundamentally altering both personal relationships and societal justice systems [57:01].
Conclusion
The discourse on free will versus determinism, as elucidated by Sam Harris, challenges fundamental assumptions about personal agency and morality. It invites a reevaluation of how individuals perceive their thoughts and actions. As understanding evolves, this debate continues to unravel layers of human consciousness, potentially altering interpretations of ethics, culpability, and the human condition. As Harris eloquently remarks, “You are not controlling the storm, and you are not lost in it. You are the storm” [17:03].