The illusion of free will

A friend recently lent me Sam Harris’s book Free Will, a compelling and thought-provoking exploration of the concept of free will.

This book has led to a re-examination of the essence of human choice, responsibility, and interconnectedness, culminating in a newfound perspective on empathy and understanding in the context of human actions and relationships.

Sam Harris on free will #

Harris presents a compelling argument against the traditional notion of free will, challenging it as an illusion. He argues that the prior states of the universe and the laws of nature shape our thoughts and actions. He suggests a predestination of all our deeds and thoughts by a continuous sequence of preceding events, rendering the traditional concept of free choice impossible.

In his thesis, Harris skilfully melds philosophical reasoning with scientific insights, especially from neuroscience. He highlights that our brains initiate decisions before we consciously recognise them. This delay, which often lasts a few seconds, suggests that we rationalise our decisions retrospectively, after our brains have already set them in motion.

Crucially, Harris’s stance on free will doesn’t rely solely on a belief in strict determinism. He acknowledges the possibility of the universe not adhering to deterministic principles. Yet, he maintains that even if randomness plays a role, it doesn’t bestow free will as traditionally understood — whether by determination or randomness, our actions do not stem from a free, conscious will.

Stoic philosophy on free will #

Stoicism, particularly as Marcus Aurelius articulates in his Meditations, presents a perspective that remarkably echoes Harris’s views. This ancient philosophy acknowledges our control over thoughts and actions, but it also emphasises that external circumstances and fate govern much of life.

The Stoics advocate for a profound acceptance of the things beyond our control, urging us to focus on cultivating virtue and wisdom within the realm of our influence. This philosophy is consistent with Harris’s notion that, whether due to determinism or randomness (‘providence or atoms’, as Marcus Aurelius writes), our actions don’t originate from a free, conscious will.

Both perspectives suggest a reorientation of focus: from striving for control over uncontrollable external events to mastering our internal reactions and ethical choices. Stoicism, therefore, does not refute the idea of free will entirely but rather redefines its boundaries. It proposes that true freedom lies in mastering our responses to the world, not in attempting to exert control over the vast, unpredictable expanse of external events.

Morality and ethics in a world without free will #

These approaches to free will invite a reassessment of how we perceive control, responsibility, and ethics in our lives, advocating for a form of internal freedom that transcends the limitations imposed by external circumstances.

Harris invites a rethinking of moral responsibility. He argues that if our actions are not the result of free will, the traditional view of moral culpability must be reconsidered. This perspective doesn’t negate morality but rather calls for a more compassionate approach, recognising the factors beyond an individual’s control that influence their actions.

Similarly, Stoic philosophy, while recognising the absence of free will in shaping external events, emphasises the significance of virtuous living within these boundaries. The Stoics believed in concentrating on what is within our realm of influence — our personal responses, judgments, and values. They posited that ethical living is achievable by focusing on our internal moral compass and the choices that are under our control, despite the absence of free will in the broader sense.

Both Harris and the Stoics shift the focus from the conventional notion of moral responsibility, which relies heavily on free will, to a deeper understanding of the various factors that influence human behaviour. This approach fosters a more empathetic stance in judging others, recognising that actions are often the result of intricate interactions between an individual’s internal processes and external circumstances, rather than the outcome of independent, free-willed decisions.

Insights from psychedelics #

My experiences with psychedelics have led me to a realisation that resonates strikingly with Harris’s arguments.

Psychedelic substances often induce a profound sense of interconnectedness and a dissolution of the ego. In these states, consciousness seems to merge with a vast, unified existence, suggesting that our selves are part of a larger tapestry.

This sensation of being part of an expansive, interconnected reality leads to a perspective where individual agency appears significantly diminished. It mirrors the idea that our thoughts and actions are not entirely autonomous. Instead, they seem woven into a broader, interconnected network of existence.

This perspective offers a visceral, experiential dimension to the philosophical and scientific discussions. It reinforces the notion that the sense of self and the ensuing belief in personal agency might be more malleable and less definitive than we commonly perceive.

Embracing empathy #

This exploration of free will invites a significant shift in how we perceive personal responsibility. Acknowledging that our actions and decisions may not stem from a free, autonomous will, we are encouraged to re-evaluate our approach to understanding and judging ourselves and others.

Firstly, embracing this perspective encourages a more compassionate view of human behaviour. Recognising that actions are often the result of complex factors — whether predetermined or random — reduces the tendency to hastily judge others. This understanding fosters patience and compassion, as we appreciate the myriad influences that shape decisions and behaviours.

Moreover, this insight leads to a deeper sense of connection with others. The realisation that our consciousness is intertwined breaks down the barriers of ego and isolation. It promotes a sense of unity and shared humanity, where empathy becomes the natural response to the actions of others.

Additionally, this perspective doesn’t absolve individuals of responsibility but rather reframes it. It suggests that while we may not have complete control over our actions, we can cultivate self-awareness and understanding. This self-awareness enables us to navigate our lives with greater wisdom and ethical consideration, even within the constraints of our circumstances.