Free Will and Determinism with Ruth Kastner

Ruth Kastner, PhD, is a member of the Foundations of Physics group at the University of Maryland, College Park. She is author of The Transactional Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics: The Reality of Possibility, Understanding Our Unseen Reality: Solving Quantum Riddles, and Adventures in Quantumland: Exploring Our Unseen Reality.

Here she maintains that quantum indeterminacy is not quite the same as "randomness" and that it does allow for the possibility of free will, which is otherwise incompatible with a completely deterministic universe. Physics, however, has nothing to say about consciousness -- a term that is not defined precisely in any physical theory. However, it is interesting to note that the "iceberg" metaphor used by Freud to describe the human subconscious can be equally applied to the ontological realm of possibility or "Quantumland" as defined in the Transactional Interpretation.

New Thinking Allowed host, Jeffrey Mishlove, PhD, hosted and co-produced the original Thinking Allowed public television series. He is a past vice-president of the Association for Humanistic Psychology; and is the recipient of the Pathfinder Award from that Association for his contributions to the field of human consciousness exploration. He is the recipient of the only doctoral diploma in "Parapsychology" ever awarded by an accredited university (University of California, 1980).

(Recorded on October 21, 2019)

[TheHamboss]

You are one of the best channells on YouTube! Thank you.

[hectormorales]

Everything is information, the friction happens when the information given to us by society and the one we acquired during life don't match. That is why new Point of views are offered in different times. Conciousness comes in form of waves to verify or to discern the information already stored in what we call our environment or whatever is calling for our attention, due to the eternal movement that sometimes we call it changes.

[MartinHomberger]

Such a great guest, fantastic conversation

[TheEvda]

Fascinating interview. Once again. Thank you to both of you.

[marekdrzewiecki]

Very interesting conversation.
I would like to ask a few questions:
If you look at the statement: "I - have - free will"

1. Who/what is the "I" that have free will?
2. Is "free will" separate from "I" or is a integral part of "I".
2a. Is "free will" within the body/mind mechanism?
3. What exactly does it mean to "have" something?
4. What is the relationship between "I" and the object that "I" have (free will)?
5. What are the boundaries of "I" and of "free will" - from subjective and objective perspective?
6. How exactly free will is being generated on moment to moment basis?
7. How is free will manifested in subjective experience?
8. Does the free will have representation/correlation in the brain? (like seeing, hearing, emotion...)

[silentvoice]

I wish i could bring Mr. Mishlove to the UK for a tour of the schools. Show the children there is "another way"

[tumblebugspace]

This is the second interview with Dr. Kastner that I've enjoyed immensely. Definitely going to obtain two of her books. I agree with the other commenters that this is one of the best channels on YouTube. Thanks for posting!

[mikelis]

Jeffrey, I didn't know I had such a good taste to be learning about psychology with William James himself!But I love your interviews, and have seen most. Hope you keep them up!Best regards.

[mattd]

I used to read the title of the UK medical TV show Casualty as Causality. It made some sort of sense to me as the plot of the show was always some new person every week doing something that would inevitably end up with them in the emergency ward.

[richtomlinson]

I believe that it's ALL INCLUDED!
Whenever someone comes up with some excuse, it just gets swallowed up by what was always meant to be.
Even when people speak of the observer, changing the outcome, well I just say the observer was meant to be there, so the condition that is observed was deterministic.
If we became 9ne with the Universe, it would be horrible in that we would just be going through the motions.

[hectormorales]

Options are already imposed we only choose the one we like the most or the most convenient. If you actually have an option it would be the one you create and not those already imposed at the moment.
Day and night is the effect of the earth rotating but it seems to be more convenient to the body to sleep in what we call the night.

[benbishop]

I've had the idea that many times we are making choices outside of physical reality in other realms. By the time we live out these events we chose, it looks like fate.

[jessieessex]

Great guest, even though she is strict in her thinking she did allow some room for other thought. Loved it.

[StephenPaulKing]

Maybe the phrase "Non-Markovian" is preferable to "Mechanistic". The evolution of Quantum Systems in sequences of interactions involves a "memory of the past" that seems to imply a logical Precedence rule: No new state can create a contradiction with previous states. We can introduce attenuations of precedence by considering how the entanglements can be modulated by of accelerations.

[TheSulross]

Scientist do have intuitions that assist them in coming up with new break throughs for new theories

[adamanderson]

I wonder what Sam Harris would conclude from this. I think this topic is so confusing because of individuals like him. You have individuals like Daniel Dennett providing other view points. But this is the best overall disscsion I have come across and makes one question the understand of how we are constructing things. I must admit that I have a bias to free will but I'm not religious. The explanation of understanding based on a humanistic approach regardless of the approach seems to be the real question. Quantum theory has really a fascinating disscsion about what it is real in the sense that we tend to want to believe.

The idea that measuring what we can't psychically determine in one state and not even necessarily having the tools to even measure the activity.

[moesypittounikos]

We've been talking like this for thousands of years. The issue turns into a thought bubble and some go for one bubble and think thats it and others think their thought is it!

[bennguyen]

Regarding the 31m mark.. some suggest (ex. Sabine Hossenfelder) that the Many Worlds interpretation does *not* solve the measurement problem of requiring a conscious observer in order to collapse the wave function.. it simply re-labels and shuffles things around. However, I'm not clear what the insight that Transactional Interpretation brings.. just that in order to collapse the wave function, an observer is required.

[dreammfyre]

Or maybe the universe very much is deterministic, but our consciousness somehow operates outside it? Because if someone would ask if a rock, a river or star has free will, you'd laugh, but those are lumps of materia just as much as we are. Where do you draw the line? Plants? Bacteria? Everything with some sort of nervous system or brain? Anything involving DNA? Is there a breaking point?

[jtothyq]

"Predictable" is a matter of human limitations. Randomness and chaos may have complex, perhaps infinite, orders that simply elude us. Things will only happen the one way they will happen. Our sense of having free will causes us to construct a lot of what-ifs that are really just impossible fantasies. Even if some individual gets really inspired and causes real changes, he cannot claim autonomy from reaction. The real question is how do we become inspired to create change.