Information and free will (Introduction)

by dhw, Tuesday, October 11, 2011, 20:13 (4792 days ago) @ romansh

A diligent search has uncovered Romansh’s early definition of free will as: “the ability to act on or make choices independently of the environment or of the universe.” Since the universe comprises everything, this defines free will out of existence. My own definition is “an entity’s conscious ability to control its decision-making process within given constraints” (the constraints being Nature and/or the situation, and factors connected with the decision-making process itself, e.g. our genetic make-up).
.
ROMANSH: I never agreed with the definition. Mainly because it includes consciousness as prerequisite. This is a poorly understood concept which requires a fair amount of handwaving. If we do not have free will then at the very least things like consciousness, the self (I), morality and life are not quite what they seem.

Even your own definition involves making choices, so how can you do that without being aware of the items of information between which you are choosing? Are we only able to act when we sleepwalk? By consciousness, I mean awareness of one’s own thoughts, perceptions, actions and environment. I agree with you that if we do not have free will, consciousness, the self etc. are not what they seem (because they seem to constitute elements of an identity over which we think we have a degree of control). But how does that invalidate the concept? Maybe consciousness IS what it seems!

You ask: “So when we refer to free will, how and what are we free from? As a free will skeptic, I don't see much. The way the debate is shaping up there seems to be a homunculus brewing in our brains.”

Consciousness is indeed “a poorly understood concept”, and nobody knows how it works. Exactly the same applies to the will. As for “what are we free from?” my answer is: from constraints other than those that are beyond our control (see below). All we know is that an element of our consciousness is able to examine information and make decisions in accordance with our conscious interpretation of that information. That element is a part of our overall identity. From here, allowing for the unavoidable Nature/situation constraints, you can follow two lines of argument: 1) this element can never be free from influences beyond its control (genetic, educational, parental etc.) so there is no free will; or 2) these influences help to fashion the identity of which the will is a part. The identity is what you’ve ironically called the “homunculus” in the brain, and it’s the sum total of our genetic make-up and all the influences and experiences we’ve been subject to. The will is therefore able to make its decisions in accordance with the current state of the “I”. I am what I am, and there are no constraints apart from those of Nature and/or the situation. That is what constitutes my/the will's freedom. However, all this is far too general. The degree of freedom (if we have it) will depend on the nature of the situation that requires a decision. I will offer you an example at the end.

ROMANSH: I agree far flung parts of the universe have negligible impact on us (at this moment). But if those far flung parts of the universe never existed, then the universe would very likely unfolded in a slightly different manner to where we are today.

You might as well say that if I was not as I am, I would be different. My decision-making ability depends on the situation as it is, on Nature as it is, on the universe as it is. But within those unalterable constraints, I AM as I am, and the second line of argument still applies: my decisions depend on me.

ROMANSH: b) Information in all its forms. Photons striking our retinas, modulated air pressure striking our ear drums, chemicals reacting with in our noses and mouths, mechanical energy and temperature changes on our skin, and inputs from our senses of acceleration and orientation. Plus the information stored in our genetic code.

No doubt some decisions will depend on some of this information. Even with my second line of argument, I wouldn’t like to draw clear borderlines, because each situation will be different. So here is a concrete example, in which none of the above seem likely to influence my decision. The choice is between a must-see film and a vital cricket match on TV. My wife dislikes cricket, but she generously says it’s up to me...So the homunculus consciously weighs up the pleasure (and importance) of the cricket against the pleasure (and importance) of pleasing my wife...Now tell me (a) why consciousness is not integral to the process, and (b) given this information (the constraints of the situation), in what way will my decision be forced on me by influences beyond my control?