Thalia Wheatley - Is Free Will an Illusion?

Some philosophers and scientists claim that because every event is determined by prior events, including every event in our brains, free will cannot be real. What are the arguments and evidence? Key is the Libet experiment, which seems to show that our brains have already made a decision—we see electrical activity—before we are conscious of making the decision.



Thalia Wheatley is an Associate Professor of Psychological and Brain Sciences at Dartmouth College.


Closer to Truth presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.

[butterchuggins]

This Will guy should be released immediately. He deserves freedom.

[bradleyfitzik]

I look at it like this: we are moving forward in time like watching a DVD. When you watch a DVD movie for the first time you don't know what's going to happen next or what happens at the end because you're watching it live (live, like Live from NY, it's Saturday Night). But all the information for the whole movie is already there. The end of the DVD has already been written. While watching it you can feel like you'd want it turn out a certain way but you obviously have no control over it (even though sometimes it feels like we do). Time is an illusion in itself. We are watching it live so it feels like we have free will but it's already all been written. That's just my two cents

[GradyPhilpott]

I'm convinced that people can be fooled in many ways by clever psychologists.

[AALavdas]

As a neuroscientist, I think that this is a pseudoproblem. ALL neural activities have have their own "gestation time", so to speak. What would the alternative be? That some out-of-body force beams down a decision, out brain becomes instantly aware of it, and acts upon it? If we believe that consciousness, thoughts, emotions, are emergent properties of an unimaginably complex network in our brains, as they seem to be, then each one of them takes some time to emerge. So is will. The process that leads to the REALIZATION of the desire to do something, is an uncomplelled process- ie, a free process. That is where free will lies, in the start of the process, despite the fact that a conscious registration of that ongoing process is somewhat delayed. And saying that a neuron fires as a reaction to "something else" does not solve anything because that something else is usually another neuron firing. And not all activity comes as a reaction to external stimuli -the existence of the default mode network is proof of that, if proof were needed.

[SalamaSond]

I think this old topic would benefit from a clarification: Free Will is an illusion of our subjective experience. The only reason it subjectively feels like "free will" is because even we don't know what stimuli will next cross our paths or enter our mind.

[alexboehm]

the underlying question is: if you set every neuron in your brain to a certain state and start the process, would the outcome (deciding to take a coffeecup) be always the same?
If you bring quantum mechanics and uncertainty into the game, then this is most probably not the case. What do you think, guys?

[DIDUKNOW]

All this woman did in her experiment is suggest that people's free will can be manipulated through the power of subliminal suggestion. However, free will indeed exists and is in effect irrespective of subliminal suggestions. One just simply has the freedom to yield to the suggestion or not.

[JamshadAhmad]

5:11 This is flawed logic.

Of course, external stimuli will affect your decisions a lot. Like maybe 99% of the time.
In your experiment, you tricked someone into thinking that it is their own decision, not very difficult to do. You can do that a million times on million people, it won't prove there is 0 free will. It just proves that external stimuli can affect people's decisions and they can be tricked into thinking that is responsible for them entirely.
Heck people often feel guilty about things that they have no control on.

[gingrai]

Post hoc ergo proctor hoc... just because there are physical inclinations toward a given action does not mean that we are not free to go with the action or even veto it.

[jamesruscheinski]

Free will and conscious choice / action are two different things. Free will when move the mouse around, conscious choice / action when employee stop the mouse. Conscious choice / action when there is a change, such as stopping mouse or starting to move mouse around, free will when keep moving mouse around. The subject was exercising free will (neural activity) until the mouse stopped, while it was the employee conscious choice / action that stopped the mouse.

[antoyal]

I will grant the "picking up the coffee cup" scenario--I find it fascinating. But how about for a less impulsive and reactive scenario, such as deciding over the course of months which college to attend, or whether to leave one job for another? Undoubtedly there are all kinds of subconscious contributors to the eventual decisions that we make in these examples, but what would be the explanation for *all* of the long deliberation being devoid of free will?

[theydisintegrate]

So what else is the point of prefrontal cortex if symbolism and conceptualization don't actually provide alternate behaviors to the lizard brain, etc? Evolutionary theory says we don't waste energy on parts that don't do anything. So what she's saying is over simplified at best... Just a little tiny part of a multi billion neuron picture. What about scale, emergent complexity, what if free will is like your fist... Do you still have it when your hand is open?

[Traderhood]

Their biggest argument is that awareness of the movement comes only milliseconds after the muscle movement. But becoming aware of something can be just a feedback loop that confirms we did what we intended to do. They have no way of telling whether intention is brain induced. Intention can initiate muscle movement and brain reacts and records this movement. Thoughts?

[md.fazlulkarim]

The hand does not go to coffee cup when there is no cup. Free will starts prior to the point you are thinking is the starting point. First you consciously choose to take coffee, then unconsciously decide how to hold the cup by your hand, then you move your hand with conscious experience. So to trace neural activity you should go back little further than your starting point.

[stussysinglet]

It’s a paradox... I honestly don’t see how I have it or don’t have it... meanwhile I’m trying to understand the experiment after listening 3 times

[patrickwithee]

When a pitcher throws a hanging curveball, is it also the case that the pitcher hit the home run that immediately followed? Just because there are external causes for our actions doesn’t mean there are not necessary internal causes for our actions.

The ad-hoc nature of free-will attribution is one of the means by which it’s real. When humans use free will, the do so by-and-large to make changes to their *lives*, not to specific actions. So, even if someone picked up a coffee cup but didn’t choose to do so in that case, they have the power to change the internal processes that factor into that action. Maybe drinking coffee causes them anxiety, so they learn to not pick up the coffee cup. So, making changes to one’s decision processes makes changes to their lives, which makes changes to their future specific actions.

“Remember, a Jedi can feel the force flowing through him.”

“So it controls your actions?”

“Partially, but it also obeys your commands.”

“I’m as free as a bird now, and this bird you’ll never change.”

[quinnmendel]

Let's say I'm playing chess. My opponent makes a move and I evaluate his move to try and determine his strategy. I form a hypothesis. I already had my own strategy in mind, but his move makes me rethink that strategy slightly. Instead of moving the piece I had originally intended to move, I make a different move. One that a I think might be more advantageous. Have I not exercised free will?

[cornerstore_d]

This is an instance where science does goes against human flourishing. Free will is a important concept for us no matter what esoteric neuroscience measurements have to say

[sspbrazil]

“Yes I have free will; I have no choice but to have it.”

― Christopher Hitchens

[craigwillms]

No matter how many atheist scientists tell me that there is no free will based on neurobiological measurements I will never be convinced. When I'm involved in certain tasks that my mind or body is screaming for me to quit - for whatever reason - and yet I persevere I am exerting my will freely. Since I clearly had a choice in the matter and the universe's "better judgement" did not agree or prevail what else would you call it?