3 posts tagged “philosophy”
By a strange coincidence one of my friends has recently been harping on about free will shortly after I had been thinking about the very same subject. Perhaps it was something in the water, or subliminal messages via the TV. Come to think of it, it was actually a few months apart and not really that surprising. Never mind.
But despite coming up a few times, no one yet has been able to answer my question or even come close. If free will does exist, how does it work? If I make the decision to turn left or right, and that decision is not determined by a product of my current state and the environment, where did that decision come from?
If you’re confused, perhaps you will permit me to humour you with a more detailed, hopefully simplified explanation. I’ll go through it quite slowly just to make sure we are all on the same page and using the same definitions.
Removing yourself from the context for a moment, consider being given the following list of numbers and asked to find a pattern:
55, 15, 54, 30, 86, 75, 82, 34, 18, 41
You would probably come to the conclusion that they were random. They are, however, derived from the following formula:
floor((tan i2 - floor(tan i2)) * 100)
Where floor returns the integer value of the input (10.54 = 10, 9.3 = 9 etc.) and i is the set {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10}
The numbers appear random at first because you do not know the underlying mechanism as to how they were created. Yet however often you put the set through the algorithm you will always get the same series of results.
This can be represented pictorially thusly:
Now choose a series of random numbers for yourself. Don’t try and be clever, just pluck them out of the air. Here’s mine that I’ll use in my illustrations, but you can replace these with your own whenever you read them:
10, 15, 26, 91, 14, 62, 25, 78, 43, 56
We can adapt the diagram we used above to represent this new situation:
We are concerned for now only with what is in that box with the question mark. Not why, or any other philosophical style arguments. Simply, for now, with what.
In order to do this we have to make the assumption that it can indeed be represented by a function. This function may include elements of free will, it may be filled completely with free will, but even the uncertainty of free will can be incorporated into this broad concept of a function – an input produces an output, a question prompts an answer, a snide comment triggers a retort, a predicament produces a choice etc.
The deterministic theory, as is my understanding of it, states that this middle box is a function of the current state of the person and the environment.
“Current state” isn’t a technical term, but it is one that I feel adequately sums up what I mean. “Current state” is the personality of the person, the mood they are in at the time, whether they are in pain etc. It incorporates their brain, their personality, aspects of their soul (if it is split from the mind), how they are likely to react to situations, all of that.
The environment represents all the external influences, such as temperature, a fork in the road, who is present etc.
If you are still slightly unsure, let me clarify with an example. The environment consists of my friend. It also consists of the fact he has just insulted me. My current state is that I am a person prone to violence1, I am in a bad mood because I’ve had a bad day and that my friend has been annoying me muchly of late. These two factors, the environment and my current state, leads me to hit my friend.
The determinist philosophy can be extended further though. How does the current state arise? What determines the current state? Ignoring questions about the origins of the universe, let’s go back to when I was born. My current state started when I was conceived, when my genetics were determined. Shortly after that factors such as the environment in my mother’s womb start to affect how I develop. There has been much medical research to suggest what your mother does while she was pregnant with you has a large effect on how you develop. Exactly how these environmental factors effects me is again determined by my current state, traceable ultimately back to genetics.
Fast-forward back to the violent encounter with my friend. The fact that I punch him has an effect on his environment, and will affect what he does next. Most likely deal with the pain then get back at me somehow, verbally or physically. But of course, how he reacts is defined not only by the fact I punched him (his environment), but by his current state (what he thinks about me, is he a violent person etc.). In this way you can see how our actions affect the environment, and ultimately the decisions of others.
But it doesn’t just have an effect on him. It also has an effect on me. It may lead to me feeling relieved, it may justify the outburst in my head and condition me to react violently more often, or it may make me feel guilty and thus begin to apologise. Again, just how it affects me is determined by my personality, or more generally my current state.
We can, then, extend our diagram to include this concept along with the feedback loop:
The outcome of the decision effects both the environment and the current state of the person, meaning that even if the same input was given, i.e. “Chose some random numbers”, the output wouldn’t necessarily be the same.
The determinist theory extends this rather obvious higher level of determinism down to the base level of biochemistry. Our neurons follow physical laws, and thus can be turned into a function that will always give the same output for a given input.
Now to come back to my question. If free will is involved somewhere in the process, the idea that the function will not always give the same output for a given input, what determines what the output actually is? If it is the personality, or the soul, how is that personality or soul developed? Surely going down that road drags us back to determinism?
As far as I can see it, the only other explanation is that there is an element of complete randomness, perhaps derived from quantum physics or some other element. But then, is free will not just the gods throwing dice to determine our fate? This certainly isn’t the same definition of free will as used by many, I am still in no more control over the outcome of my decisions than in determinism, indeed it would seem even less.
All this has possibly interesting implications in accountability and law. If what I do is not my choice, but is determined by the environment, why should I be punished? It’s not my fault. However, as I see it, it should not change how we punish people, only how we perceive them.
If a person does something wrong we should pity them because society, their parents, their friends and their genetics made them that way. But should we punish them for their ills? Of course we should. How else would we keep order within society? It is the deterrent of punishment, of the repercussions that keeps me on the straight and narrow. I don’t actually punch my friends (that was just an illustration) because I would get into trouble and because they would retaliate.
Prison isn’t a punishment; it hasn’t been for a long time (or at least shouldn’t have been). It is a deterrent and a correction centre. It is a mechanism for us to keep society on track and not running amok.
One area that it does have serious implications, however, is religion. Take, for instance, the Christian faith. In order to get eternal life in heaven rather than in hell I must make the decision to accept that Jesus is my saviour and that he died for my sins. Some arrive at this decision by careful deliberation; some have grown up in an environment that teaches this, while others have had miraculous experiences. But what about all those people who haven’t had that extra bit of push that leads to that epiphany? Is it fair that just because the environment hasn’t yielded the right conditions for them to be able to make that step of faith that they must be condemned to a Godless life? I know I’m placing human ideas of fairness onto a spiritual idea, but it’s certainly one to think about.
1 I don’t consider myself a violent person, and I very rarely hit people. This is just for the purpose of the illustration.
I've been following Russell Brand's Radio Show [bbc.co.uk] via podcast since he moved to BBC Radio 2 a few weeks ago, and I have to say I have been enjoying it muchly. I would highly recommend it.
The broadcast from the last Monday had an interview with Morrisey which Russell seemed to be very excited about, Morrisey being a hero of his. And I have to say, I do very much enjoy Morrisey's music too.
However, from the interview he comes across to me as a bit of an arse. My personal disagreements with his vegetarianism, sorry, not killing animalism, aside he makes two points I would strongly disagree with.
Firstly, he makes the sweeping claim that qualifications are unneeded. Princess Diana didn't need them, he didn't need them, and a bunch of other people didn't need them. So clearly no-one needs them. Never mind that we need quantitative measurements of peoples abilities and motivation to feasibly assign work. It is a combination of training and nationally recognised assessment preventing the need for every place of work to implement a baseline test.
The second is his assertion that there is no point in planning for the future, as tomorrow "he could be run over by a horse". Yes, and you might not. In fact, you've had 17365 days and counting of not being run over a horse. Yes, you should live every day with the knowledge that it might well be your last, but that doesn't mean you should live in ignorance that there is a high probability that it might not be.
However, those irks aside, he is also quite funny. And makes good music.
It was my mothers birthday a few days ago, and she decided she wanted to go down to the beach. It's not a proper holiday for her, she says, unless she's been to the seaside and we hadn't so far this year. So we duely took a trip to the beach.
We first went to the place where she had spent many a childhood holiday, just to see if the caravan site was still there. It was. The beach, however, was a stoney one and so it had been decided we would quickly proceed to a more pallatable sandy beach.
I had planned to be lazy, I was tired after all, and sit and ready my book for the entirety of the visit. However, soon after we got there my mum went to go swimming and I decided to join her. We both marched off to the toilets to get changed (and make good use the facilities) and swam for a bit, which was very nice.
After sitting and managing to squeeze a bit of reading in, my younger brother called me over to look at the series of holes and tunnels-come-waterfall he had created. It was very reminisent of the sorts of constructions I used to create when I was younger, and I decided to help extend it by digging another hole beyond them and tunneling to make the waterfall even longer. Or at least that was the plan.
It started as a spade by spade hole, going deeper and deeper. However, because the beach was quite flat I soon ran into water, the source of my later problems. It is often the way that the only reason to dig a hole on the beach is to get to water, but when the water comes it causes alot of troubles. Is it worth it? You bet. But, as I said, hitting water too early makes it very difficult to create a small, managable hole.
The water began eating away at the bottom of the hole until the sides collapsed in, which I duely dag out. This, however, meant that the hole kept getting bigger and bigger and soon ecclipsed my poor little brothers more creative efforts. As I focused on making sure one side didn't collapse, the opposite side would suddenly cave in. Then, as I began digging out the fresh rubble another wall would suddenly plop into the now shallow water. I would finally be able to dig out the cave-in and begin making it deeper when more would fall.
I continued working on the ever widening hole for several hours, contemplating my solitude. Some girls near me had created a very impressive sand sculpture of a crocodile (I overheard one father preposterously correct his son and call it a dragon). Several people had passed it and commented on it's impressiveness. All the while I was digging and remembering how my older brother used to dig holes on the beach, far more impressive than the one I was currently immersed in. Mine ended being about 5' x 5' x 3', his he could comfortable stand in and still be covered. I remembered also how he would build dams, but not on his own, other children would come and see his impressive construction work and they would join him. A communial effort to block off the waters retreat back to the sea. But I was happy to dig alone. My hole later roused some interest by I think the same girls who designed the sculpture, but my younger brother soon befriended them as I slaved away digging and they went off to start their own project.
Ironically, as I was digging, I couldn't help but be struck by the similarities between digging a hole and relationships. Obviously the analogies could be taken too far, but at the risk of sounding like an English teacher I found the links intreaging.
I started college off intending my friendship group to be small, but intimate. And that's how it started. I made a couple of friends early on and one of them has stayed one of my best and closest friends. But, like the hole, your social group quickly begins to expand, even against your will. Your new friends have their own friends, and you meet them and become friends with them. Despite your best efforts, you can't ignore these new friendships or all your friendships will collapse.
As you try and manage these new friendships, nurture and grow them, you find yourself spread too thin. You spend so much time paying attention to one group that another group begins to fracture and fall away. You then focus all your time repearing damage and fixing things, just in time to find you've neglected someone else and the cycle begins again.
With recent events, neglects and people going off to University I find myself at the stage where a large number of walls, if not all of them, have collapsed in. In the process I've managed to rediscover and start to rebuild another friendship that had broken down, but I've now got to start the process of digging out the rubble, and finding whole new walls of friendship. Obviously I would like to keep in touch with the people that are going off to University, and I dearly hope I will. However, things will never be like they once were, and I now have to focus on the new people that will soon come into my life.
I did have some photos of the hole and the crocodile, but unfortunately something went wrong with the memory card and so we lost some photos.
