Free Will and Prescient Imagination

Free Will Explained

---

Determinism is the principle that causality is responsible for all events in the universe: that everything is determined by causality.

Free will is a more slippery concept than is determinism and has different meanings to different people.  This essay will try to explain free will from my compatibilist point of view.

Because time is linear, the future hasn't happened yet. Future events unfold everywhere simultaneously, yet is locally unique. The birth and death of an entire galaxy is irrelevant to us if it's so remote we can't even see it. While the senseless death of a starving child in Africa is tragic and heartbreaking, you'll undoubtedly never know about it. The point is that causality permeates the entire universe and makes its mark on everything: whether or not any particular event seems momentous or even noteworthy. But how do these events affect the future? Will anything we do make a difference in the grand scheme of things? The Big Bang has predetermined the demise of the universe . . . so aren't our own lives equally predetermined?

With this frame of reference, I propose that the future does NOT exist and is NOT predetermined everywhere, for everything. The futures of inanimate objects, however, ARE predetermined unless they fall under the control of animate beings. Wherever intelligent life leaves an impression, the future is far from predetermined. What I'm talking about is the distinction between animate and inanimate modes of response to causality -- the difference between us and rocks. This distinction is most clear when we use humans as the example. This is because humans, unlike other lifeforms, embody ALL the key phenomena of life -- motility, consciousness, intelligence and, yes, free will.

The law of causality states that: "every material effect must have an adequate antecedent cause". This is true of both animate and inanimate objects. The difference between the animate and inanimate modes of response to causality is that inanimate objects have only one potential reaction to an event while animate beings have variable potential reactions to an event. One major reason for this is that animate beings are complex systems. They have many functional parts that integrate, holistically, into single entities. Animate beings are much more complex and much less predictable than inanimate objects. I'll be discussing determinism versus free will, so, for animate beings, let's stick with humans.

Whether or not you believe in determinism or free will . . . or believe free will is compatible with determinism (as I do), it's pretty difficult to deny causality (and, therefore, determinism). Without a single scientific experiment for support, we can, at any time, observe that cause always precedes effect. Conventional wisdom holds that free will is antithetical to determinism . . . but I hope to show that determinism (causality) actually creates free will.

Human identity and experience presents a problem for determinism. We all live as if we have free will: we work, play, think and plan as if we have free will. On the other hand, we can see that causality determines all events. How do we reconcile the difference? First, we need to acknowledge there might not be a difference. What if causality creates free will?

That's my basic premise: causality (determinism) creates free will. Nothing I've written above is essential to what follows -- I just wanted to frame free will in context of time and animate beings: of life.

Allowing no exceptions to causality, we must accept that effects can't exist without antecedent causes.  Therefore, the processes of the brain, such as memory, thought, analysis and imagination, can be thought of as effects caused by the brain. Of these effects, imagination is most relevant to free will . . . because imagination can be prescient. We can extrapolate cause and effect into the future to imagine potential scenarios that might occur. We then evaluate these potential scenarios and gauge the likelihood (and to what extent) they might actually happen. This is, essentially, the process of planning. We use our experience and intelligence to estimate future outcomes, then plan the steps and contingencies necessary to best ensure -- or avoid -- those outcomes. Of course, short term, simple, plans are more likely to succeed than long term, complicated, plans. Depending on our skill at prognostication, our success rates vary from person to person. But, on the whole, short term plans usually succeed. I know this, without question, from my professional experience as a project manager.

How does planning relate to free will? Here's the interesting, awesome, part. Our ability to mentally anticipate cause and effect represents a temporal advantage over causality. Causality must wait for the future to unfold in the present but we can keep steps ahead of causality by extrapolating it into the future. In other words, we can (in our imagination) go where causality can't . . . and bring back conclusions that greatly affect our decisions. Steered by these conclusions, our choices guide us, step by step, through potential futures.

When causality meets human intelligence, we make decisions based on forecasts of events likely in our futures. There are other causal factors involved, like experience, heredity, education, circumstances, etc., but it's prescient imagination that steers our decisions in self-directed ways. When determinism meets human imagination, it becomes self determinism: free will.

The claim that free will (volition) is antithetical to determinism is a false dichotomy stemming from any assertion that assumes free will is undetermined or indeterminate.  If that's how you define free will then, of course, free will would be impossible.  After all, EVERYTHING is determined.  Right? Free will is not a conscious process or goal of itself, requiring effort to exercise: it's an on-going, natural, human, reaction (effect) to the world around us (cause).

Volition, of itself, is not free will.  That would make free will indeterminate -- and we know that's not possible: EVERYTHING is determined.  Volition, desires, plans -- whatever you want to call them -- are just causal factors that combine with other causal factors to influence our decisions.

The compatibilist view sees free will as natural and within the confines of physical laws. Undetermined or indeterminate choices or actions would be anything but free will: acting without reason or purpose is not free will. Neither is acting randomly. So, claiming that free will is not deterministic means that, if we do have free will, then we must act without reason or purpose, or we must act randomly, or some combination thereof.

But we KNOW we act with purpose. We don't stumble through life continually shocked to find ourselves doing things we don't want to do. That would make planning impossible! We KNOW we've planned our own dinners, careers, families, retirements and funerals.  Our experiences represent continuous empirical evidence for free will.

Our ability to plan is so natural and human that we take it for granted. We're inured to it. The future and planning is a larger consideration in our lives than most people realize. Planning, as a prescient form of imagination, is caused by the brain's interaction with the world (causality). Free will is the effect -- the product -- of our prescient imaginations.

It's a paradox. We have no choice but to be self-directed. We are causally self-determined.  Free will is a part of human nature.

Our individual destinies are NOT written in the stars (may the force be with you) -- our destinies are ours to make. We (as well as ALL life forms) might eventually face extinction as the universe grows cold and fades away. Our collective destinies might be extinction but our individual destinies are ours to make. Most of us will die obscure deaths but a select few -- as long as humanity survives -- will be remembered by history because they exercised their free will to fundamentally change our world.

Why Islam is a Rabid Dogma

What, exactly, do I have against Islam? Plenty!

I lived, for 6 months, in Kuwait and I've been in the Philippines (where there's a Muslim insurgency, in the south) for over 3 years now. It's very important to understand that the adherents aren't the problem: the religion -- Islam, Muhammad and the Quran -- is the problem. Extremists have NOT hijacked Islam -- Islam has hijacked extremists. This difference can't be emphasized enough.

Having spent most of my life overseas (Japan, Panama, Okinawa, Virgin Islands, Hawaii, Kuwait, Philippines) I know for a fact that people are the same everywhere. Most people are good and decent: some are not so nice. A few are downright pathetically depraved. It's the same everywhere.

The problem with mainstream adherents is that they're apathetic about their religious institutions. It's the squeaky wheels that end up commandeering the agenda. With religions, squeaky wheels = fundamentalists. Extremists constitute the fringe of the fundamentalists. Yet these minorities tend to control or overly influence the direction of their religions: particularly when those religions have a weak hierarchy or no hierarchy at all.

Islam is a rabid dogma. I challenge anybody to find uplifting verses in the Quran. For every one you find (there ARE a few), I'll quote you at least 20 to 50 negative verses. Islam is a harsh, uncompromising religion: there is no wiggle-room for a moderate interpretation.

Then why do so many people subscribe to Islam? Early on in Islamic history, they were converted at the edge of the sword. After that, people mostly inherited the religion and haven't really studied it closely (much the same as Christians). Many of the ones who have studied Islam, started as children, in school, where they were encouraged to memorize the Quran. As a consequence, most adults don't know much about the Quran and many of the ones that do were brainwashed as children. I won't even go into the teaching of hatred for Jews and Israel to school children . . .

Consider the areas where Islam prospers: the Middle East / Mediterranean, Africa, and Asia. These are all harsh, under-developed, locales: harsh geography, harsh environment and/or harsh economy. The harsh, uncompromising, discipline of Islam, in human terms, is best matched to these harsh locales.

Though most Muslims are basically good people, many of them don't know what their own religion stands for. They repeat the few positive verses of the Quran as if the whole scripture is positive. For them, Islam is more defined by their Mullahs than by the Quran. And most Mullahs are fundamentalists, though there are exceptions, of course. With western cultures condemned as immorally decadent and with exposure to western cultures often restricted, Muslim countries depend on censorship to keep their populace ignorant of the superior ideals of the west. I know that last sentence will be a red flag for the moral relativists out there but they're going to have to admit that Islamic values just aren't up to progressive, modern, standards.

In Kuwait, there are daily calls to prayer at specific times during the day. All activity stops and everybody prays. If you're in a grocery store, you better quit shopping until the prayer ends. From minarets across the city, clarions bellow prayers in Arabic. As the sun sets, some drivers on freeways pull over to the shoulder, lay down their prayer rugs, and kneel to Mecca. There are many devout Muslims across the world. The vast majority of the devout are very nice people. A few are murderously hateful: they fill the ranks of the Jihadis. If only 1 percent of Muslim men are recruitable to the Jihadi cause, that would equal over 7 million Jihadis. I'm sure there are far fewer active Jihadis than that but if the conflict should escalate, there is a ready reserve of potential Jihadis.

Judaism and Christianity have both been reformed over the centuries. They lack the power they used to have. The worst thing about Islam is that it's still unreformed. The Old Testament (Torah) has worse atrocities than you'll find in the Quran but the Quran is dominated by us-versus-them, Muslim-versus-infidel, rhetoric. The Quran gives ample license and cover to violent Jihad. Jihadis know that they'll be admired by most Muslims because they actually practice what the Quran preaches. They fully embody the Quran and follow Muhammad's example.

Of course, there are others who could care less about religion. The most cynical of them will gladly take advantage of the Quran's license to kill and join Jihadis and terrorists out of sheer bloodlust. It takes all kinds of people . . . but the Quran empowers the worst of them to join ranks and kill indiscriminately in the name of Allah.

Absolute Determinism: May the Force be with You

Many people believe in determinism – not just determinism, but “hard” determinism (I’ll call it by its more descriptive name, absolute determinism). They claim that absolutely everything, including our acts and thoughts, has been predetermined ever since the Big Bang (Prime Mover). Their belief is based on the universal, cascading, chain reaction of cause and effect as defined by the laws of physics. With their belief that the laws of physics are on their side, determinists can be downright dogmatic. Debating them can be like debating fundamentalist Christians or Muslims. They often treat their opinions as fact and are dismissive and derisive of other opinions: just as all fundamentalists are. Too many hard determinists appear to have knee-jerk reactions provoked by the mere assertion of a contrary opinion. Absolutes and fundamentalism go hand in hand, it seems.

In science, a hypothesis or theory is scientific only if it is “falsifiable”. This doesn’t mean it’s false; just that if it is, it can be revealed as such. Outside the quantum realm, determinism is NOT falsifiable. It is therefore relegated to philosophy but, of course, may find support in scientific arguments. The laws of physics surely provide argument for determinism but those laws do not extend beyond the physical realm. For instance; life, consciousness and intelligence are dependent on physical bodies but are not, themselves, physical. They’re abstractions – projections – without any physical properties of any kind. Trying to extend the laws of physics into this abstract realm is just not legitimate.

The unique, animate, nature of life marks a radical departure from the strictly inanimate nature of the physical universe which preceded it by many billions of years. Relatively speaking, life made its appearance very recently and human intelligence arose just a virtual heartbeat ago. This represents a dramatic development in the history of the universe.

Not ALL physics lend support to determinism. Quantum theory is the most precise model of physics man has ever devised and is the vanguard of modern physics. It’s a theory imbued with randomness and uncertainty. This doesn’t negate determinism but it does blow absolute determinism out of the water. As an indeterministic model of random, unpredictable events, quantum theory demonstrates that there are other modes of existence compatible with determinism. Thus, absolute determinism does not extend to everything, everywhere, all the time and is absolutely falsified by quantum theory.

Outside the quantum realm, determinism, given the above considerations, then becomes a model of physical causality that describes the interactions of inanimate matter. This model provides predictability, in perpetuity, unless interfered with by “free agents”. You guessed it -- we are the free agents.

Though springing from the human brain, human intelligence directs and, to large measure, controls the brain via a “feedback loop”. This synergistic symbiosis is revealed by many of our “higher” mental activities, such as: memorization, learning, invention and creativity. For instance, we can choose to read a poem or to memorize it. If we choose to make the conscious effort to memorize it, we may not know which modules of the brain has stored that poem but we do know we can recall it at will and without external prompting. That is the feedback mechanism that provides us free agency.

Another essential component of free agency is motility: the ability to move about on our own. This is also another feature that obviously separates us (and other animals) from the inanimate matter that otherwise constitutes the universe. Like quantum randomness, free agency also demonstrates another mode of existence distinct from, yet compatible with, determinism.

Living beings react differently than inanimate things. Above the quantum level, cause and effect has only one predictable outcome for inanimate objects (like billiard balls). However, cause and effect (stimuli) can have unpredictable outcomes for living beings. Hit a billiard ball on the right side and it will move left, every time. Hit a worm on the right side and it might recoil, or it might move left, right, forward, back or whatever. Did the worm react to stimuli? Of course. Was it's reaction necessarily predictable or predetermined? No.

Life introduces capricious reactions distinctly different from the predictable reactions of inanimate objects. Motility is a feature that enables animals to choose a reaction that is not predetermined in the way the reactions of billiard balls are.

Life is an entirely new mode of response to physical cause and effect -- even if that life is just a worm. That mode of response grows more expansive as we move up the evolutionary ladder from reptiles to mammals to man. With human intelligence, we are able to observe, learn from, and use causality to our own advantage. We use physical laws to power our civilization and probe the solar system. We change the landscape and freely interfere with causality (sometimes to detrimental effect). We can change the course of rivers, history and even meteors.

It is childishly simplistic to suggest that the creations of Boeing, NASA, Rembrandt, Mozart, Robert Frost, etc., are chance occurrences absolutely determined by cause and effect, without benefit of freewill. Take, for instance, the pinnacle of man’s accomplishments: man on the moon. If you believe in absolute determinism -- that everything, from moment to moment, from beginning to end, has been scripted ever since the Big Bang -- then all the effort and resources that went into putting man on the moon describes a mystical, cosmic, script so precise that you might as well say God wrote it (“May the force be with you”). I guess coincidence is God's way of remaining anonymous.

Yes, cause and effect influences us. But not absolutely and not to the exclusion of freewill. The universe will eventually fade out or collapse into the Big Crunch. Any interference we, as free agents, exert on events will not make a real difference in the grand scheme of things.

While we may not be significant, we are nonetheless special.

© Jim Ashby, AtheistExile.com "You may say I'm a dreamer . . ."

A Brief History of Human Spiritual Evolution

GENESIS
In the beginning, men were not much more than animals (some might claim they haven’t changed much). Although they had human brains, there wasn’t a lot of abstract thought going on (some might claim there still isn't). They were mostly concerned with mere survival. The sun, the moon, the stars, volcanoes, weather and seasons were utter mysteries to them.

Over time, they developed enough language to ponder life and death. This led them down a path of spiritual evolution; beginning with animism, and progressing through polymorphism, polytheism and, finally, monotheism. As with the evolution of species, their spiritual evolution carried through some old traits while acquiring new ones. This progression, from animism to monotheism, is abundantly documented by archeology and anthropology.

ANIMISM
Primitive man’s fear of death aroused speculation about the nature of life, which in turn led to the concept of the soul. Man extended the concept of soul to significant objects in his external world. This is known as animism.

Animism doesn’t confer godliness and doesn’t, of itself, constitute a religion. However, most religions stem from a belief in god(s), which in turn stems from a belief in souls. It is fear of death that brought gods into this world.

Animals were undoubtedly among the first to be bestowed with souls by early man. Of these animals some were vital to man’s survival. This key relationship led to man’s next baby-step on the path to religion – anthropomorphism.

ANTHROPOMORPHISM
Anthropomorphism is the attribution of uniquely human characteristics and qualities to animals, inanimate objects, or natural phenomena. With human emotions and motives thus attributed to: animals, volcanoes, the sun, the moon, rivers and oceans; many gods were born.

POLYTHEISM
Gods proliferated. The more important they were to man’s survival, the more revered they became. There were gods of: the sun, woolly mammoths, aurochs and rams, etc. Stone, then metal, idols of these gods were created, worshipped and sacrificed to. Primitive man was very much polytheistic.

Worship evolved into full-blown religions. Hinduism is the first great religion and is still practiced by a billion adherents – making it the third largest religion in the world.

MONOTHEISM
The first claim of a supreme God was made in the Late Bronze Age, by pharaoh Akhenaten, who proclaimed that Aten was the only god allowed. This monotheism was short lived and Egypt reverted back to polytheism 20 years later, after Akhenaten’s death.

ZOROASTRIANISM
At about the same time as Atenism, another new monotheistic religion, Zoroastrianism, claimed Ahura Mazda as the Supreme God and Creator. He was the only god of the Avesta (their scripture).

Zoroastrianism spread throughout Babylonia (where the Israelites were slaves) and into the kingdoms of Judah and Israel, and even the Roman Empire, during the 800-year period (1000 to 200 BCE) in which the Jewish Torah was being written. Many scholars see Zoroastrianism as the most influential religion in history, either directly or indirectly. This is because Zoroastrianism is the originator of many concepts appropriated by the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam). Some of these “borrowed” concepts and beliefs include: The Kingdom of God; immortality of the soul; God as Creator; the virgin birth of a great prophet; a belief in God and Satan; a belief in angels and demons; a belief in heaven and hell; a belief in individual judgment at death; a belief in physical resurrection and the coming of a redeemer; and a belief that the world will culminate in a final battle between good and evil.

THE ABRAHAMIC RELIGIONS
The Book of Genesis is sacred to 3 religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The 6 key biblical figures before Abraham – Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel, Enoch and Noah – are featured in all 3 religions, as well.

Moses, Jesus and Muhammad are all claimed to be descendants of Abraham through one of his sons. Abraham is: the patriarch of Israel to the Jews; a major prophet to the Muslims; and to Christians he is a symbol of faith, as well as a physical and spiritual ancestor of Jesus.

These 3 religions share a lot in common, such as: monotheism; a prophetic tradition; Semitic origins; a basis in divine revelation; a belief in good and evil based on obedience to God; a history beginning with creation; and shared stories of Adam, Noah, Abraham and Moses.

THE ABRAHAMIC LEGACY
The history of these 3 religions reveals another commonality: an enmity and outright hostility that continues to this very day. The religious wars and petty reprisals between these factions of Abraham have resulted in thousands of years of misery and suffering and millions of deaths.

This undeniably divisive component of the Abrahamic religions offers little or no hope of reconciliation; leaving mankind with the prospect of continued turmoil for the foreseeable future. We seem hopelessly doomed to kill each other in God's name unless or until the adherents of these religions finally understand that their religions need a "zero-tolerance policy" against violence of ANY kind – especially that performed in the name of God.

So there you have it. Fear brought gods into the world and ignorance is keeping them here. What this means for mankind is aptly summarized by Voltaire . . .

“As long as people believe in absurdities they will continue to commit atrocities.”

. . . In this day and age, isn't it about time we gave up these ancient, superstitious beliefs?

Jim Ashby, AtheistExile.com -- You may say I'm a dreamer . . .