Free Will or Agency: What Drives Our Behavior?
Exploring where our actions and decisions arise from.
Set Your Pulse: Take a breath. Turn your attention to your body and release any tension. Breathe slowly into the area of your heart for 60 seconds, focusing on feeling a sense of ease. Stay connected to your body as you read. Click here to learn why we suggest this.
In the area of philosophy, and now neuroscience, the question of free will has been a hotly debated topic for a long time.
Neuroscientists like David Eagleman, who has hosted specials on the Brain for PBS, are now of the opinion that the brain works on the basis of neural networks. Eagleman maintains that these networks may sometimes even compete for which “decides” on the action.
He goes as far as to speculate that the visual areas of the brain, which are presumably “off” during sleep, actually remain active to remain “relevant” during sleep which results in dreams. The suggestion is that they do not want to cede their participation as part of the networks by shutting them down.
That’s an interesting theory because of course dreams are themselves a rich area of speculation in which many believe one may be accessing other dimensions or realities unavailable when awake.
In modern spiritual circles and among many philosophers who stress the wholeness of Everything or the concepts of nonduality, free will is, of course, a nonstarter.
Why Free Will is Doubted
It would require a separate person to exercise free will and if there is only ONE, then there are no separate persons.
Wayne Liquorman, one such nondual proponent says, “If you have free will, use it.” I’ve taken that as a challenge occasionally to use the present moment to motivate myself to do something I was resisting.
The problem is that after the event, upon further reflection, one can recognize that any one of a number of external and internal factors preceded and may have had a causal effect on what you think you “did.”
Some suggest that if you accept the notion of cause and effect that it all goes back to the Big Bang.
And as one is analyzing such an experience, it becomes clear that every one of our explanations is simply a story, constructed presumably by the same brain that we are attempting to analyze.
This brings us back to the “Hard Problem of Consciousness” that I wrote about recently; who is there to actually explain consciousness after all is said and done. In a world of General Relativity, who is the impartial outside arbiter of “who” did “what”?
Beliefs Are Accumulated
When we examine who we think we are, if we are honest, we find that we are a collection of conditioned beliefs sometimes called the Ego. But if one looks deeply, no such single entity is anywhere to be found. All we ever really get to is Awareness of any thought, feeling, sensation or belief.
So What About Personal Responsibility? A big problem for society as neuroscience probes the brain and finds “committees” of neurons rather than a sole “human” identity anywhere – is who is responsible for actions?
With the preponderance of mental illness across North America, due to the stresses of what has become a toxic society, at what point will PTSD be viewed the same way as temporary insanity?
So that someone with a plethora of stresses and documented trauma could plead temporary insanity if they lashed out and killed someone?
Of course, addressing the causes of PTSD might then result, and turn out to be a boon for society in the long run if a recognition of the true cost of stress might lead to actual significant investments in medical health in general and mental health in particular.
I mentioned Dr. Gabor Mate, author of “The Myth of Normal” in a previous article about trauma, which is Dr. Mate’s specialty.
Dr. Mate uses a term that I have heard more and more frequently recently in discussions of both psychology and neuroscience.
As an aside, isn’t it interesting how in our culture we distinguish between these two intimately related fields as though they are somehow separate?
We Reduce Fields that Are Interrelated
Of course, we also make a powerful distinction between Science and Philosophy (or “metaphysics”) anointing science as the same impartial and objective separate source of Truth, as we might with the separate “human identity” referred to above.
I believe that so many of our problems would find solutions if academia and society did not distinguish and reduce what is truly whole. We now mainly recognize authorities in separate fields like neuroscience and psychology, awarding specialized degrees to people who reduce their investigations to the narrowest possible scope in order to be recognized. A sense of wholeness is sacrificed in this reductionist science.
Here again we can look at indigenous cultures that did not distinguish between, for example, medicine and spirituality. They understood that the human is a whole organism with energetic activities that overlap these fields.
One need only recall Bill Moyers’ seminal work, “Healing and Mind” to see both how revolutionary such a perspective was just recently, and how much evidence there is behind it.
Thinking In Terms of “Agency”
Getting back to Dr. Mate – he stresses how much loss of self confidence is the result of trauma, forcing many into isolation – and instead of free will and getting into that quagmire, he uses the word “agency.”
What is so interesting is the way Dr. Mate uses the word. I actually asked ChatGPT to summarize his approach to the concept of agency:
“According to Maté, having agency refers to the ability to make conscious choices and take responsibility for one's actions. It involves recognizing that we have the power to shape our lives and make decisions that align with our values and well-being.
But Maté emphasizes that agency is not solely about personal willpower or individual control but is also influenced by various factors such as childhood experiences, trauma, social environment, and biological predispositions. He emphasizes the importance of understanding the underlying causes of behavior, particularly in the context of addiction, as a means to develop compassion and support individuals in their journey towards healing.”
The first part of this description sounds a lot like free will: one can ask who is there to make conscious choices and take responsibility (from a stern nondual perspective) and then we are stuck.
But of course Dr. Mate’s approach, as the AI summarizes, goes beyond the notion of “individual control” into the external and internal factors, including the so-called individual’s social environment and personal history. It takes the matter beyond a sense of control or cause and effect and suggests intentional actions that are pursued from a much expanded sense of “Self” – outside or inside to span a multitude of influences and factors.
Wholistic Resonates with Nonduality (One)
This holistic (or “Wholistic”) approach clearly has the potential to reconcile our storied beliefs about who or what we are with the clear understanding that once again, everything is connected.
The presumed self that develops “agency” then is no longer simply a separate individual, isolated in opposition to a world that may turn hostile and stressful. He or she can now begin to feel self-compassion as actions are seen in context with an environment that is very complex, intricate and ALIVE.
From this perspective, a broader understanding of oneself can emerge and as one ventures deeper and further in using one’s “agency” – as Liquorman suggests using free will he doesn’t believe in – we may well sense a profound connection between who we thought we were with what actually IS.
I’m not a big fan of new buzzwords, but reading the description of how Dr. Mate sees agency makes it a powerful concept in both accepting responsibility and self-acceptance – healing.
(Tom Bunzel was a contributor to Collective Evolution and now writes for The Pulse. His new book "Conversations with Nobody: Getting to Know ChatGPT" – a book written with AI, about AI and giving a taste of AI, is available on Amazon.)
Fascinating.
We are whole, good, bad, beautiful ugly.
You can no more separate your spirit from your mind than separate your brain from your body.
This is why holistic healing has become quite the new health care model.
I think it can be over analyzed to the point of endless befuddlement.
If indeed we have the autonomy to choose our actions then we are indeed responsible for them.
The area of addiction is no different than say the type one diabetic. In either case you must relent to the prescribed treatments to maintain optimal personal health. They are both sicknesses that can only be treated. Neither are choices in that one could not simply decide to not be afflicted, but you can decide to follow the treatment regimen necessary to live as well as you can in-spite of them.
We are most assuredly shaped by our lived circumstances that can result in psychological (and even physical) injury from birth through whatever stage is present. That is the imperative to “be present”.
There are endless means through which we can and probably should seek enlightenment. Such as reading through and pondering the essay above.
Peace out
Thanks for your article on whether humans have free will, or whether it is an illusion to think that we do. The way i see it, the nature of being human has often been equated to having free will -- by both philosophers and spiritually-wise individuals, alike.
i absolutely have no question that i have free will, and need no outside source to tell me that. One test for being certain of that, is that i am able to effectively choose between any argument you have made that either implies i do not have free will, and ones that conclude i am indeed able to exercise my will by my inner choice, discounting claims of being a proxy of external agencies. To me, the real question is how it is possible that anyone can be manipulated into believing they don't possess free will, which is such a basic element of our existence here on this planet ?
Animals act primarily on the basis of instinct, when out in Nature -- which is 'located' at the collective level for their specie, but also connects with all of Nature at a deeper level. We, humans, also have an instinctual mind, which is demonstrated by the 100th Monkey Effect of being able to acquire new knowledge we haven't individually learned, but that has been learned by a critical number of other people anywhere on the planet, which thus has been entered into the human collective instinctual level. Also Carl Jung has written extensively on the Collective Unconscious which is revealed in our dreams and represents symbolic knowledge that is shared across all of humanity.
However besides an instinctual mind, humans also possess an "Inner Life" which we perceive as being in a 'place' inside us -- where we think to ourselves before we take action out in the world. This is where our conscience is also located. We know it is ourselves that is the origin of that inner voice we experience, because when sometimes other inputs try to take over that space, i.e. through trauma, we are aware of the difference. Obsessive thinking and compulsive behaviour can be a sign that our Inner Life needs some attention. However people generally are well aware they are not acting completely in their best interest when playing out psychological patterns -- ones which will come to make sense to them, and which they can then again change with their conscious free will -- through utilizing classical psychodynamic therapy (less so through the brain-visualization based behaviorist approach currently in vogue).
The complete loss of the integrity of the Inner Life only comes in the situation of psychosis, even though the inner experience of the person going through that process, is still understandable and the healing of it, possible, as was shown by psychiatrists like R. D. Laing, before the advent of the unconditional psycho-pharmaceutical approach universally employed today.
In regards to the legal aspects relating to free will in criminal situations, there is a fine balancing act involved in determining whether a person acted through their own free will in committing a serious criminal behaviour, and who is thereby personally responsible, or whether they have shown specific signs of a defined mental disorder, to which the criminal act can be attributed, whereby they are then deemed not criminally responsible but are kept in treatment until they they are deemed again free enough from the disorder. The trouble in moving the fulcrum of this balance to accept more and more situations into the 'not-personally-responsible' side, i.e. people simply with PTSD, is that it would inevitably lead to the deterioration of everyone's personal free will authority in society.
Putting people away in a mental asylum forever, to keep them from revealing evidence that is dangerous to the government's political position (or the rogue actions of agencies w/in the government), had been a typical practice in the USSR, but America has apparently not been exempt either, i.e. in the JFK assassination coverup, Ralph Yates who picked up an inconvenient CIA agent/Lee Harvey Oswald look-alike hitchhiker with a package of curtain rods (thereby duplicating and throwing suspicion on the gov't contention that the real Oswald did it) -- and who could not be made to recant his firm belief in his story of picking up such a person -- although being perfectly sane, was kept for years in a mental hospitals in Texas until his death. (reference: James W. Douglas, "JFK and the Unspeakable") By making it easier to judge people who commit acts listed in the criminal code, as not responsible due to a mental disorder, it would correspondingly make it easier to judge political dissidents, or those who simply don't comply with health measures they find are dangerous to themselves, the same way, and enable them to be put them away for "treatment" indefinitely. In China this is called "cultural re-education."
The whole world is already going down this slippery slope of retracting personal responsibility, aka free will, towards those who would 'know better,' i.e. brain researchers with dueling neural network theories, well-meaning trauma experts with multi-factorial "agency" considerations, and politicians eyeing the consistency and expediency that AI exhibits -- to act as judge in some court cases.
i respect Dr. Mate’s position on having many factors taken into account regarding personal responsibility in situations where a person infringed upon the criminal code due to having had trauma, but i believe we must keep the nature of free will separate from personal responsibility, the latter being based, as far as the law goes, on knowing what is right and wrong. Someone who is psychotic does not, by definition, possess that ability, whereas someone addicted to drugs or under the emotional limitations of trauma, still does know the difference, so with them a judgement against the criminal code should be made with significant leniency given. Even the basis of trauma as i understand it, is much more to do with what the traumatized person gave up themselves in the crisis event, like not fighting back against a rapist, than with the violation they experienced by the rapist. So making it seem that due to previous trauma, a criminal charge can be dropped on the basis that the person was not able to choose what they did -- exactly contradicts what they need to heal in regards to the trauma -- accept that they did (consciously) choose not to fight against the rapist and to (consciously and emotionally) forgive themselves for that, and re-own their fighting spirit. Too often society supports a psychological disability rather then supporting healing from it, i.e. through disability benefits that one can barely exist on, with no funding for psychotherapy, only 'maintenance' visits to a psychiatrist or mental health worker, but with unlimited free pharmaceuticals that cause addiction, and do nothing for their trauma, but keep the person in a perpetual medicated state.
The fact is -- the action of free will, through which each of us, within the space of our Inner Life, consider and evaluate our personal choices -- can belong to no one else, but the respective individual human. It is beyond analysis and predetermination, because it is inherently equal to what a human being is. Due to the requirements of maintaining a just society grounded in principles of truth, freedom and liberty, in some situations like the necessity around determination of criminality where mental illness is a factor, judgment needs to be very carefully employed using established and regularly re-evaluated criteria, all done with the oversight of impartial (and absolutely human) decision makers.
Free will essentially is a quantum value -- whereby the free will of each individual of a democratic society is equal to everyone else's, but where the unjust loss of the free will of only one person, represents the loss of the complete free will ethic of the whole society. The nature of free will forms the basis of democracy and the saying "i disapprove of what you say, but i will defend to the death your right to say it." The use of juries composed of the accused's peers in court cases, recognizes this principle of the free will inherent in each person, and thus it must never be allocated to an AI program. It is not about some idea of the AI being more able to judge impartially and consistently -- it is about the fact that a person with free will, should only be judged in a court of law by a holder or holders of the same human free will quantum value.
We have many good lessons from history where the rise of dictators and autocrats led to the loss of the free will of individuals and groups, and eventually the whole society crumbled. The civil rights marches and actions of the 1960s and 70s wrenched away the oppressive values and beliefs held and enforced for centuries by elitists, and established the society we have today, where the free will of the individual is recognized in all its respects, and laws keeping it in place should never be allowed to erode. The conscience of each human being, directly tied to humanity's collective, quantum free will value -- which essentially is akin to our quantum consciousness itself -- is the greatest safeguard against any take-over of our civilization, ultimately even against the loss of planet Earth to an alien race which does not possess, nor value, this quantum essence.
On the other hand the integrity of our Inner Life, the place in us where our free will conscience resides, may be in jeopardy like it never has before, since humans have walked the planet Earth: https://www.bitchute.com/video/59wjaT2mAGC4/