yego.me
💡 Stop wasting time. Read Youtube instead of watch. Download Chrome Extension

Daniel Dennett: Stop Telling People They Don't Have Free Will | Big Think


3m read
·Nov 4, 2024

Well, let me trot out one of my recent favorites which I devised to jangle the nerves of neuroscientists who've been going around saying that neuroscience shows that we don't have free will. I think their reasons for saying that are ill considered and moreover that what they're doing is apt to be mischievous and doing some real harm. So I concocted a little thought experiment. A little intuition pump to suggest that.

So this is the case of the nefarious neurosurgeon who treats a patient who has obsessive compulsive disorder by inserting a little microchip in his brain which controls the OCD, the obsessive compulsive disorder. Now there is such a chip. It's been developed in the Netherlands and it works really quite well. That's science fact. But now here comes science fiction.

So the neurosurgeon, after she's operated on the guy, sewed him all up. "So I've got - your OCD's under control now you'll be happy to learn. But moreover our team here will be monitoring you 24-7. And we're going to be controlling everything you do from now on. You'll think you have free will. You'll think you're making your own decisions but really you won't have free will at all. Free will is an illusion that we will maintain while controlling you. Goodbye, have a nice life." Sends him out the door.

Well, he believes her. She had a shiny lab and lots of degrees and diplomas and all that. So what does he do? Well, he -- thinking he doesn't have free will anymore he gets a little self-indulgent, a little bit aggressive. He's a little negligent in how he decides what to do. And pretty soon by indulging some of his worst features, he's got himself in trouble with the law.

He's arrested and he's put on trial. And at the trial, he says, "But your honor, I don't have free will. I'm under the control of the team at the neurosurgery clinic." They say, "What's this?" And they call the neurosurgeon to the stand. They say, "Did you tell this man that you were controlling his every move, he didn't have free will?" She says, "Yeah, I did. But I was just messing with his head. That was just a joke. I didn't think he'd believe me."

Now right there I think we can stop, take a deep breath and say, "Well, she did something really bad. That was really truly harmed him. In fact, her little joke telling him that actually accomplished nonsurgically pretty much what she claimed to accomplish surgically. She disabled him. By telling him he didn't have free will, she pretty much turned his free will off and turned him into a morally incompetent person.

Now, if we agree that she did a bad thing -- if nobody recommends people play jokes like this -- what do we just say about the neuroscientists who are telling the public every day, we've shown in our neuroscience labs that nobody has free will? I think if the neuroscientists recognize that what my imaginary neurosurgeon did was irresponsible, they should think seriously about whether it's irresponsible of them to make these claims about free will.

And it's not just a fantasy. Vohs and Schooler in an important paper which has been replicated in several different ways set up an experiment really to test this with college students who were given two texts to read. One was a text -- they were both from Francis Crick's book, The Astonishing Hypothesis. And one was not about free will and the other was about free will and basically it said free will is an illusion. All your decisions are actually determined by causes that neuroscience is investigating. You don't have free will, that's just an illusion.

All right, so we have two groups. The group that read that passage and the group that read another passage from that book of the same length. After they've read the passage they're given a puzzle to solve where they can earn some money by solving it. And the experimenters cleverly made the puzzle slightly defective so there was a way of cheating on the puzzle that was, oops, inadvertently revealed to the subjects.

And, guess what, the subjects who read the passage where Crick says free will is an illusion cheated at a much higher rate than the other ones. In other words, just reading that passage did have the effect of making them less concerned about the implications of their action. They became -- were negligent or worse in their own decision making. I think that's an important and sobering thought.

More Articles

View All
This Spider Wears Its Victims Like a Hat | National Geographic
This massive ant colony maintains cohesion through constant chemical communication. This signaling method facilitates the collection of food, defense of the colony, and, very creepily, collection of their dead. However, chemical signatures can be minute. …
Impact of the Crusades
We’ve already had several videos where we give an overview of the Crusades. Just as a review, they happen over roughly 200 years during the High Middle Ages. The First Crusade, at the very end of the 11th century, was actually the most successful of the C…
Warren Buffett Just Made a NEW $10B Investment
This video is sponsored by Steak. Download the Steak app today and use the referral code AWC to receive a free stock when you fund your account. Details in the description. Hey guys, welcome back to the channel! In this video, we are going to be talking …
Should You Move Your Company to Silicon Valley? - Eric Migicovsky, Pebble Founder
Today I want to talk about the question: Should you move your company to Silicon Valley? This is a question that’s pretty close to my heart because I started my company, Pebble, in Waterloo, Ontario, and I decided to move my company to Silicon Valley afte…
Chi-square statistic for hypothesis testing | AP Statistics | Khan Academy
Let’s say there’s some type of standardized exam where every question on the test has four choices: choice A, choice B, choice C, and choice D. The test makers assure folks that over many years, there’s an equal probability that the correct answer for any…
Safety Sealing a Jar of Smoke
Let’s make a fresh jar of smoke. The problem with old jars is their safety buttons are popped up. Everyone can tell they’ve been opened. But you can reverse this by sparking up some combustion. Dump the flame in the jar, and the flame will turn oxygen int…