Free Will Study Guide Flashcards
generic formulation of free will
ability to choose what one does, even if one did X, could have done Y
link from free will with moral responsibility
only acts done freely deserve praise/blame, typically don’t blame for actions done while mentally ill/coercion/reflexes, if not done freely then will not blame or praise
the main issues in the free will debate
classical: is world deterministic (everything HAS to happen)? If world is deterministic can free will exist
alternative: is world materialistic (mind is physical and mind and brain are one)? And if it is does free will exist?
thesis of determinism, and why it threatens free will
every event in the universe is such that it HAD to happen, given laws of physics and state of the universe before event, if actions are determined then may not have free will because don’t have free choice
quantum physics and why it doesn’t seem to help free will
brain operates on chemical responses and electrical signals governed by physics, so if determined then no free will, view world mechanicalistic, everything is due to physics like billiard balls, microphysical level that occurs only with a probaility - quantum randomness doesn’t help make room for free will, instead is determined by randomness and electrons move by possibility
compatibalist view
if determinism is true, there could still be free will because it requires only ability to do otherwise if one had decided to, one has this as long as not in jail/mentally ill/controlled, so make one’s decision free in relavent sense
incompatibalist view
if determinism is true, then no free will because free will requires ability to do otherwise
main shortcomings that compatibalism is commonly considered to have
compatibalist gives free actionbut not sure if enough for moral responsibility, might only be morally responsible for actions undetermined and not random (kind that would be if dualism is true)
argument for compatibalism
WT Stace, soft determinist, if determinist is true then compare stereotypical case of free and non-free action is determined, whether action is determined or not doesn’t dictate if free or not, so incompatibalism is false, definining whether free or not is if it is in line with one’s desires - free acts
original formulation of free will in terms of determinism
is world deterministic (or close), if is deterministic can free will exist (aka dualism is false)
alternative conception/formulation of free will
is materialism true? if materialism is true can there be free will?
hard determinism
incompatibalism, determinism is true, don’t have free will
libertarianism
incompatibalist view, determinism is false, and we have free will
conpatibalism view (brief def)
whether or not have free will (means there is soft determinism) that says determinism is true but we have free will
connection between free will and conscious will
need for robust kind of free choice is for it to come to some sort of directed, non-physical causal force, like a soul, certain actions are precipitated by our willing them or consciously deciding to do them, perhaps an action shouldn’t be considered free unless it comes from one’s conscious will
dualism
mind is nonphysical, exists outside space, maybe immortal, AKA substance dualism, dualism - 2 things mind and body
interactionist substance dualism
brain affects nonphysical mind (stove cause pain), nonphysical midn affects body and brain (pain so rub finger), soul, mind nonphysical substance that interacts with brain
substance dualism
every physical part of you is non-continous, but is something continuous who is you, this most be nonphysical mind
materalism
mind is physical and is protons/electrons arranged in new way, form of monism, brain and mind are one thing
how materialism/dualism relate to free will and true free choice
interactionist substance includes personally directed, non-deterministic force that seems important for truly free action, nonphysical force that affects
argument against dualism
mind damage, because damage to brain makes mind damage, shouldn’t happen if mind is nonphysical, phineas gage, if brain does all this (ToM, mental states, new/old memores), what’s left for nonphysical mind
argument for dualism to combat phineas gage issue
dualism says not unexpected because need all pieces together for something to work - brain is a tool/apparatus
antedating of sensation experiment with libet
left S1 stimulation causes tingle on right hand only if more than 500ms, left S1 stimulated at same time, right hand tingle felt after left hand touch
details of somatosensory cortex and location
is just posterior to central sulcus, superior to lateral sulcus on postentral gyrus, contains representation of surface of body (is somatopic)
conscious will experiment (brief)
explore when consciously will an action and when brain initiates action
measurements for conscious will experiment
time of wrist flex - emg
time subject says they initiated action
time of readiness potential - eeg, negative shift in brain’s electrical activity that reliably precedes voluntary motor actions wich is thought to be decision to flex
libet results
readiness potential started RP 553ms before action, subjects said initiated 193ms before action, so wrist flex started before they knew, so action not caused by conscious will (epiphenomenon - by product - of unconscious decision making), W is awareness of intention
how EEG works
spiking of neurons makes electrical signals, electrodes placed on scalp pick up electrical signals, mental events can be identified by patterns of electrical activity (ERPs - event related potentials), good temporal resolution, but bad spatial and only measures outside of brain
what libet results mean for hard determinism
determinism is true so no free will, this on still works
Libet results meaning for libertarianism
determinism is false so have free will - this is a problem and doesnt work now, 2 problems are conscious will might be determined/random AND not source of voluntary action
what libet results means for compatibalism
whether or not determinism is real we still have free will, but need action to be caused by conscious if considered free so 1 problem ehre that conscious will looks to be not the source of voluntary action
idea of free wont
idea that you don’t make the urge to do something but still have the ability to do both
study for free wont
conscious veto trials, asked people to do wrist flex then veto action right before (100-200ms), libet said means can’t consciously initiate action but can veto, so conscious is gatekeeper - might assume dualism
problems with conscious veto study
question if it has unconscious source, 300ms cerebral preparation
objections to libet experiment - that libet actions are not free actions
actions done in experiment are not good examples of the kind of intentional action in question in free will debate, action initiation doesn’t actually precede conscious willing
why simple flexing action might not be considered act of free will
free action is grounded in reason and motivation but libet actions aren’t, conscious willing actually happens at time subject accepts experimenter instructions and wrist flex is automatic, aka wrist flex is bad example
idea that libet experiment free action occurs way earlier than decision to flex
argument that time of conscious willing is actually earlier than subjects report and that initiation is actually later than measured
two ways to show action initiation doesnt precede free will
time of willing is earlier or readiness potential is later
prior entry effect criticism of libet experiment
attention to one modality will make event seem to have happened earlier than simultaneously and unattended event in another modality, cause 70ms shift at most, cannot close 300ms gap between W and RP
high variability in subjects judgement for libet experiment
extreme cases with one subject high and low means 231ms and 80ms before movement, another subject 542 and 351ms before movement
reason to think subjects are mistaken in when decision happens
other studies show RP always precedes W high variability notwithstanding, libet results have been replicated, makes general results look valid
relevant experiments and what they were generally about for that subjects mistaken when decision happens
divided attention studies show that RP always before W, libet experiment replicated lots, I spy study, time-locked beep, induced conscious willings
banks and isham view and experiments they ran
subjects infer W from its cues so retrospective inference, ask if we have physiological mechanism telling us when to act, moving time of observable event also move W, subjects were asked to push a button which would make a beep, delayed beep caused later W
argument against RP being sufficient for wrist flex
decision to flex wrist precedes will then conscious will doesn’t make it happen, EEG is messy so neural activity can vary, detect RP with back average (averaged trials), so needs fixed point which wrist is flexed to compare to back average so non-flex trials not counted
argument against RP being necessary for wrist flex
pocket and purdy say not necssary nor sufficient, need neural signature of decision but if RPs happen when no intentional act maybe not neural signature, RP like waveforms precede other events like stimulus perception so maybe signature of anticipation not decision
skepticism of if conscious willing exists at all, how it might lead to idea that is no definitive moment of conscious decision
subjects get W from cues, moving time of event results in moving time of willing, so like introspective opacity - I spy study with mous then stop one thing after someone says it and they think they did it when they didn’t, induce free choice with click TMS raise finger and subjects think they did when they didnt
general conclusion for libet experiment
seems that conscious willing somthing we infer rather than direct percieve, may be no such thing as conscious willing, libet experiment made on mistaken assumption, worry is not if W is good measure, rather there is nothing for W to measure
