Chapter 2 – Free Will is Empowering. Do You Have It?
Collection: Brain Owner-User Manual (CVR)
The Collection’s Posts
This book is all about the truth. Therefore, this is how one knows the truth.
- Thinking
- Mental Health
- History
- Rationality Proofs
- Tools For The Rational
- Tools For The Dysrational
All Owner Manual Posts
- One person’s truth is another’s misinformation or malinformation; the result, humanity drowns in a sea of useless and dangerous ideas.
Truth Confusion? It is easy to understand why. A man with a watch knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure. Segal’s Law Consequently, some claim to possess the absolute truth, yet they cannot. The objectively true process of reason prohibits it (see the… - Conceptual thinking (and the perception of monotheism) shows up in the brain’s neurology.
Abstract Conservatives are more sensitive to threatening/anxious situations in perceptual and cognitive levels, experiencing emotional responses and stress, while liberals are more responsive to but tolerant of ambiguous and uncertain information. Interestingly, conservatives have greater psychological well-being and are more satisfied with their lives than… - There is only one source for truth, or civilization cannot exist.
The importance of objective truth. Civilization exists because of objective truth. Until fairly recently, Western Civilization shared truth because of Christianity. Yet, the first time it was challenged, it ended the Holy Roman Empire, which gave rise to Western Civilization. The religious wars then began… - The Cause of the Enlightenment
Now, consider the linked image. It potentially demonstrates the cause of the Enlightenment. You see, before the Reformation, the Holy Roman Empire controlled truth, and Western Civilization began to take shape. Unfortunately, absolute authoritarianism corrupts. Martin Luther thus led a successful rebellion against it (circa… - The Bible’s First Commandment Demands That You Think For Yourself — How Great And Generous is That?
On X (Twitter), an atheist complained that the Bible told people what to think. Atheist: Me … The atheist’s claim is not true. The Bible demands that you think for yourself. In fact, this Commandment is the first and most important Commandment (says Jesus). “And… - The Neurological Point of Faith
An X (Twitter) user declared – If Jesus isn’t the focus of worship in your church, it isn’t a Christian church. I say that’s unfortunate. Consider this: The cortex (see image) is directly connected to the senses. You cannot use the cortex without activating elements… - Different Destructive Movements Emerge From The Same Cognitive Disability
Dysrational Movements Are The Adult Face Of Emotional Immaturity The anti-rational (i.e., dysrational) movements Marxism, Nazism, and “wokeism” are dysrationalAn irrational person is not thinking rationally, but they can. A dysrational person is pathologically unable to think rationally. movements. Each shares a common and fundamental… - ChatGPT glitches out: Rogue AI responding in nonsensical Spanglish, gibberish — In other words, “hoarder” thinkers can lose control of what they think they know. Mental illness surely follows.
Individuals who do not practice free will (SELF-control) may become thought hoarders. If these thoughts/ideas are not reconciled with one another, mental illness likely results. This concept may be difficult to understand, yet it happens. AI can offer a real-world demonstration of the problem. The… - Or … cogito, ergo sum, (Latin: “I think, therefore I am) dictum coined by the French mathematician and philosopher René Descartes in his Discourse on Method (1637)
If you hear a voice in your head while not speaking, is it YOU, God, the devil, or something else? From what place do you think it originates? What neurological purpose can you imagine it serves? Do you perceive it to be rational or emotional?… - The antichrist is all too real. It is Orwell’s “Ministry of Truth” — War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. — The rejection of objective truth.
Twenty-first-century individuals wonder, is the antichrist religious superstition or reality? It is an important question. I declare now, regrettably, that the antichrist is all too real. However, I also state that the antichrist is deeply misunderstood. It is, foundationally, not a person. It is a… - Are we living in a simulation?
RE: Is reality a simulation? The answer can be one of three possibilities. As an initial step, for us to be able to consider the above question together, we must have an objectively true (SHARED) process to discover truth. That is, we must agree to… - Intelligence Spectrum
This post is an image only. It sums up my understanding of human thinking. Share on Facebook Post on X Follow us Save - The Only Two Ways To Save Civilization
The Solutions Why is civilization failing? Short answer: DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) over merit. The relevant question is instead: What is happening to Western Civilization’s capitalistic commitment to merit? Individuals are increasingly trapped in a prison of their minds, chained immutably to what they… - Why God at all?
On Twitter, the debate about the existence of God, at least amongst those atheists and theists that I regularly interact with, has achieved detente. Now, most individuals comfortably accept that the existence of God cannot be proven or disproven. The question now often is: Why… - Self-control is the doorway to discovery.
The key skill parents and education must accomplish is the development of self-control (free will). AND … Develop SELF-Control! Do this, and the individual becomes a lifelong learner. Do it not, and the individual becomes a lifelong victim. Share on Facebook Post on X Follow… - Atheism, The “Father” Of Human Dysrationality
For a person to maintain their capacity to reason, it is not possible to claim to know, absolutely, the truth about any question. I can make this above claim, absolutely, because it arises in this (my) definition for reason. See: Key to the above definition… - The Source Of Societal Disharmony.
People … A short list: Visit Site Share on Facebook Post on X Follow us Save - The Atheist View/Objections, Application Of Reason
I evangelize reason. My second company, LearningFramework, was formed many years ago with that objective. At that time, we didn’t know enough about the process of reason. Maybe we still don’t. Yet, civilization depends upon human-facilitated growth in reason for its longevity. Until now, reason… - A Thoughtful Dialogue With An Atheist RE Absolute Truth, The Creator, AND Reason
FIRST, I embrace monotheism for my capacity to reason (God bless Abraham). I also selectively accept religion. All of them. The post’s picture is that of St. Thomas Aquinas. He’s a smart one. From Twitter (The TOC Is A List Of Questions) What do you… - SELF-control is Free Will
Free will is, in truth, FREE WON’T (See learningframework.com post on Benjamin Libet). FREE WON’T is also known as SELF-control. Critically, SELF-control is key to emotional maturity and good mental health. Without FREE WON’T (otherwise known as SELF-control), humans cannot be “smart.” These individuals will not… - Interesting Questions Do Not Usually Present A Convincingly Verifiable Solitary Answer
A Contemplative Cognitive Posture Is Practically A Must For example, the “woke” are principally postmodernist thinkers. The woke, generally, also include the political left, Marxists, progressives, and neo-liberals. These particular groups comprise people that believe they KNOW the truth. In addition, when the Christian right… - How do I find the truth?
On QUORA: How do I know the truth? Truth is established when a hypothesis meets both the necessary and sufficient conditions. Note especially that the proposed hypotheses must be disprovable. In other words, one and only one hypothesis is permitted as an explanation for the observed. This requirement is essential… - What are the pros and cons of public shaming?
What are the pros and cons of public shaming? Shame and praise are the tools a parent uses to steer a child. Adults, however, accept that other adults have freedom of thought and are therefore entitled to maintain their own beliefs without this controlling emotional…
Home
All Collections
This site comprises a detailed and complete explanation for reason; how it is achieved, and how it is undone. It is arranged, principally in subject matter collections.
Collection: Brain Owner/User Manual
- Learn How The Brain Works
- Learn How to Think For Yourself
- Create Superior Mental Health
- One person’s truth is another’s misinformation or malinformation; the result, humanity drowns in a sea of useless and dangerous ideas.
- Conceptual thinking (and the perception of monotheism) shows up in the brain’s neurology.
- There is only one source for truth, or civilization cannot exist.
- The Cause of the Enlightenment
- The Bible’s First Commandment Demands That You Think For Yourself — How Great And Generous is That?
Collection: Artificial Intelligence
- The Artificial Intelligence Model
- When Is AI Dangerous?
- How Is AI Like Human Thinking?
- How is AI Unlike Human Thinking?
- ChatGPT glitches out: Rogue AI responding in nonsensical Spanglish, gibberish — In other words, “hoarder” thinkers can lose control of what they think they know. Mental illness surely follows.
- It is not appropriate (thus fair) to contrast the process of science with the Book of Genesis.
- AI Would Fail the Marshmallow Test
- AI May Be A Step Backward–Or, And This Is The More Likely Truth, AI Is A Fraud
- Irrationality is dangerous: humans often are, but AI (artificial intelligence) always is.
Collection: Divine Influence on Reason
- Discover The True Relationship Between Faith And Reason
- Strengthen Your Commitment To Faith
- Achieve Divine Grace
- Discover The True And Potentially Righteous Nature Of Humans
- There is only one source for truth, or civilization cannot exist.
- Is it Possible that Sin is Only One Thing?
- I think, instead, Nietzsche meant to suggest that the Holy Spirit is “dead.”
- The Source of Error – A Fundamental Conflict Between Truth And “the Pursuit of Truth”
- The Cause of the Enlightenment
Collection: Societal Realization Of Reason
- Learn How Critical Reason Is For Civilization
- Learn Tools For Reason When Individual Citizens Lack Reason
- Understand Social Media And Its Ideal Structure
- Why Do The Dysrational/Irrational Hate “Disinformation” While The Rational Hate Censorship
- Key Requirements To Produce Reason In Education
Collection: Political Essentials for Reason
- Why freedom requires Self-reliance and Self-governance
- The Perfection of A Constitutional Republic
- The Threat of Atheism/Marxism/Socialism
Collection: The Shadows of Reason
- Understand How Three Centuries Of Philosophers Percieved The Human Mind And Reason
Collection: Why Civilizations Fail
Why Do Civilizations Fail? – A Collapse of Reason, Of Course
- Homo Sapien History & Rationality
- What Prompts The Recurring Rationality Collapse
- Is This Always The Reason Civilization Fails/Falls – Hint (yes)
- What Can Be Done To Stop It?
No feed items found.
What Is Your View of Free Will? – It’s A Tell.
- You believe that free will does not exist or that it may not exist
- You believe that free will exists
- You are certain that free will exists, AND, you can explain what it is and how you get it
What it tells …
(1) If you claim that free will does not exist, then likely you …
- Probably don’t have free will (but you still can);
- Don’t believe in objective truth;
- Are probably an atheist;
- Don’t tend to believe in the existence of a meritocracy;
- Are attracted to “subjective truth” philosophies like post-modernism, Marxism, critical theory, etc;
- Think reality is a construct;
- Believe that individual freedom is overrated;
- Tend towards acceptance of censorship of others;
- Are programmable (via propaganda) and are hypnotizable;
- Would prefer to control the thoughts of others using “subjective truth” philosophies like post-modernism, Marxism, critical theory, etc.
(2) If you feel that free will exists, but do not know precisely how, then it is likely that you …
- Have free will from time to time;
- Believe in the meritocracy;
- Believe in capitalism;
- Are likely, though not necessarily, religious;
- Are suspicious of “subjective truth” philosophies like post-modernism, Marxism, critical theory, etc;
- Value freedom;
- Dislike but tolerate mis/disinformation;
- Could achieve enlightenment;
- Tend towards a belief in self-governance and self-reliance;
- Are still vulnerable to programing by others (the effects of propaganda).
If you claim (3), you are among the few.
- You absolutely have free will;
- You are likely deterministically enlightened;
- You believe that freedom is key to happiness;
- Abhor “subjective truth” philosophies like post-modernism, Marxism, critical theory, etc;
- You do not see capitalism or the meritocracy as broken or wrong;
- Mis/disinformation is largely irrelevant to you personally. It certainly does not threaten or upset you;
- Are likely an autodidact;
- Are self-governing and self-reliant;
- People, across the political spectrum, make sense;
- With your free will, propaganda has no effect on you, but you are still vulnerable to programing by others (the effects of propaganda).
Section Goal – Create motivation to think about the free will question.
Does Free Will Exist?
Yes. Absolutely.
AND, to possess a completely free and healthy mind, the ‘free will question’ must be answered with a confident yes by you as well. Furthermore, to be confident that your deterministic (deciding with what you already know) mind is not playing tricks on you, you should prove your complete and unvarnished understanding of free will by thoroughly explaining your understanding insights of ‘free will’ to another. Attempt to enlighten them. Hint and caution: you almost certainly can’t. Yet, when you later find that you can fully explain to yourself why this “teaching” task is impossible and that the reason is related to free will, then you might actually, at that moment, have an authentic grasp of free will. I know it’s an odd process, but it’s nonetheless required to circumvent your ever-involved deterministic decision-making brain.
The Importance of Free Will
Nevertheless, without free will, others will hijack your mind. It’s a promise. Others will propagandize your mind to their benefit and your detriment. That’s how human civilization, in part, works. It’s the way some. Think about this. Just how many of your beliefs arise from your own independent thinking? The rest, I would hazard to say, came from the programming of others. Civilization advances through independent thinking, but it operates, primarily, through the programming of others. Accepting the thoughts of others is sometimes acceptable, but you must never do so thoughtlessly, i.e., without your own due diligence. There are two principal ways to enhance one’s well-being, free thought and the new value it creates, or, through the manipulation and control of others.
Truly free-thinking people have no interest in the mind control of others. Instead, they came to understand their freedom of thought as culture. It’s their way. In fact, they need the independent and contrary views of others to test their views. The ‘freedom of thought people’ seek the truth. And, the process of freedom of thought is antithetical to thought control. Nevertheless, thought control has happened since before the emergence of homo sapiens, when earlier primitive hominids, lacking reason and free will, efficiently programmed their tribe’s minds without the nettlesome interference of their member’s independent thinking. Homo sapiens, by contrast, have had a capacity to reason as enabled by their free will. This makes programming their minds much harder.
Still, the mind control tools are always there. Many great civilizations have been built that way. Civilization needs a great many people-as-gears for its machinery-of-structure to function. But control isn’t everything. Homo sapiens’ freedom of conscience has paid off in many other ways. For example, Neanderthals, possessing significantly larger brains, existed in Eurasia for 300,000 years and improved their arrowheads (a few other skills too). Whereas, homo sapiens, in a few thousand years, put a man on the moon. Neanderthals learned to produce Levallois arrowheads. Whereas, twentieth-century humans produced smartphones–and this, in a fraction of the time. Without free will and reason, life, as humanity knows it, would be inconceivable, and thereby impossible. Yet, to benefit from it fully, humans must consciously understand and master it.
Unfortunately, because of the sea of thoughts civilization produces, not everyone engages their reason and free will. Eventually, a fight emerges for the minds of those with undeveloped independent control. It seems like this is where we are today.
Sidebar Discussions
Foreshadowing the complexity of free will
Producing free will and reason is not easy. I’ll provide an answer as to why below. Yet, the answer may not initially make sense to you. The form of the free will question and answer is, from one perspective, paradoxical. I structure the question this way to compel your thinking. If the subject of free will makes sense to you too quickly, then you didn’t have to think about it. Likely, your mind jumped to conclusions. Free will, or really something more accurately called free won’t, is studied only from reason, and reason is the part of your mind that cannot arrive at conclusions. Instead, it searches for understanding. Whereas the decision-making portion of your brain produces conclusions, using what it already knows, and thus as you will see below, can never enjoy free will (or free won’t). The debate on free will has turned on this point for thousands of years.
This is the free will paradox you must reconcile. I know. It is weird. Just think about it. Ideally, this is not a conclusion to arrive at.
I think I can provide a final ‘insight’. Usually, people are comfortable with answers or conclusions (decision-making). See if you can get comfortable just thinking about this question (reason). Look for ways to feed your thinking in order to keep it going.
The Long-Running Free Will Debate
I provide the following paragraphs to feed your thinking. Both prior (to this document) sides have made some compelling observations.
The free will perspective of others
- (THE LENGTH AND SCOPE OF DEBATE) “Questions concerning the nature and existence of this kind of control (e.g., does it require and do we have the freedom to do otherwise or the power of self-determination?) […] have been taken up in every period of Western philosophy and by many of the most important philosophical figures, such as Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Aquinas, Descartes, and Kant.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- (NO FREE WILL) In this 1994 article, Strawson defends what he calls the “Basic Argument.” According to it, we have no ultimate moral responsibility for any of our actions, so praise or blame, reward and punishment for our actions, cannot be ultimately just. Galen Strawson: Basic Argument
- (NO FREE WILL) Author Sam Harris against free will: “And there is no way I can influence my desires—for what tools of influence would I use? Other desires? To say that I would have done otherwise had I wanted to is simply to say that I would have lived in a different universe had I been in a different universe.” Harris, Sam. Free Will (p. 20). Free Press. Kindle Edition.
- (FREE WILL EXISTS BUT NOT PROVEN) Philosophers (e.g., Reid 1788 [1969], Swinburne 2013) sometimes claim that our belief in the reality of free will is epistemically basic, or reasonable without requiring independent evidential support. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- (FREE WILL EXISTS BUT NOT PROVEN) Philosophers have long claimed that we have introspective evidence of freedom in our experience of action, or perhaps of consciously attended or deliberated action. Augustine and Scotus, are two examples among many. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- (FREE WILL PROVABLY EXISTS) This document.
Concisely framing the free will question
From Eliezer J. Sternberg’s My Brain Made Me Do It: The Rise of Neuroscience and the Threat to Moral Responsibility (quoting):
- If neurobiological determinism is true, everything we do is completely caused by prior biological events, so we cannot be held morally responsible for our actions.
- If indeterminism is true, our actions are random and we cannot be held morally responsible for them.
- Either neurobiological determinism or indeterminism is true.
- Therefore, we cannot be held morally responsible for our actions.
In his book, Eliezer J. Sternberg is troubled with contemporary neurology research with its free will implications. Sternberg nevertheless still believes in free will. However, one can sense his doubt in his negative framing of the ‘free will’ issue above. His doubt is misplaced. Sternberg’s free-will framing is merely incomplete.
A sidebar on determinism
It’s worth a pause to ensure that our understanding of the term “determinism” is shared. Philosopher Sternberg uses the phrase “neurobiological determinism” to mean that an answer to an issue or question is arrived at by what a person already knows. In other words, an answer is produced algorithmically, predictably, using beliefs and information the person maintains in their head. Crucially, this means, that for a given input, the result or answer will always be the same. In neurobiological determinism, as Sternberg states, there is no possibility that the deciding individual can come to an answer using their free will.
“Truth determinism” (my contribution) is similar. Here, however, it is truth that is potentially claimed by the decider (not merely the process to arrive at the truth). With truth determinism, the individual proceeds in their thinking with a belief that they can claim (claim to know) the truth. Yet, if there is truth determinism, there must also be its opposite, truth indeterminism. Truth indeterminism produces reason. And it’s the only way to produce reason.
Neurobiological determinism is indeed either true or false. Sternberg and others state:
- If neurobiological determinism is false, “our actions are random and we cannot be held morally responsible for them“;
- AGREED. Everyone concurs that human decision-making is not random, and, cannot be random. Neurobiological indeterminism does not exist.
- If neurobiological determinism is true (according to most, the only other possible option other than false) then “everything we do is completely caused by prior biological events, so we cannot be held morally responsible for our actions“;
- NO, Sternberg’s (and others) view is incomplete.
Human neurobiological determinism is not one thing, it is two: (1), decisions in the service of the self (subjective truth), AND (2), decisions in the pursuit of truth (absolute truth). Though they are distinct and separate processes. Across the ages, philosophers and scientists have put (1) and (2) together, or, seemingly ignored (2) altogether. As a result, the solution to the free will question was beyond their philosophical reach.
The bigger picture
Moreover, the pursuit of truth is a process without end. The definition for reason requires it. Here also, if the pursuit of truth accepted eventual decision-making, or, deciding what is absolute truth, then (1) and (2) would again collapse into a single concept. Free will would again disappear.
Humans require a tool to move between the two deterministic systems:
Benjamin Libet and free won’t
Benjamin Libet, through some revolutionary work in the 1980s, changed how the world looks at free will
Follow this link to a short, excellent video on Libet’s work and experiment: The Libet Experiment: Is Free Will Just an Illusion?
A sidebar on free won’t
Free won’t isn’t the only way to halt the decision-making brain’s decision-making. When a person doesn’t have an answer, their decision-making is automatically stopped. Robert Pirsig (Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values) calls this being stuck.
Stuckness shouldn’t be avoided. It’s the psychic predecessor of all real understanding. An egoless acceptance of stuckness is a key to an understanding of all Quality, in mechanical work as in other endeavors. It’s this understanding of Quality as revealed by stuckness which so often makes self-taught mechanics so superior to institute-trained men who have learned how to handle everything except a new situation.
Robert Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values
Another thing a person can do is place their mind in a state of deferred decision-making. I described this in the “What do you think?” chapter of this book. Finally, outside of decision-making, a person can place themselves in a state of reason with curiosity.
Curiosity is reason perfection. It is how the “reason brain” keeps itself dominant over the decision-making brain. In curiosity, understanding is the focus of life. In decision-making, the self is the focus of life.
This power to reject a decision made by the deterministic brain was famously labeled free won’t by Libet. Free won’t is how a person moves between the part of the brain deciding in the service of the self, to the other part, the brain deciding in the pursuit of truth.
Section Goal – Establish that the free will question is long-standing and apparently complicated.
The Definitive Free Will Answer
ANSWER: Free will IS free won’t. They are the same.
The resolution of the free will question is that simple. Moreover, FREE WON’T is the door to Truth Indeterminism. Consciousness opens that door.
Benjamin Libet discovered free will years ago, but since the habitually deterministic brains of humanity were looking for (free) decisions, they overlooked the answer. And yet it was there all along. A person’s free will is, in fact, the sole decision, should you elect to take it, not make a decision at all (with what you already know), but instead to pursue understanding (and look for answers you don’t know). This decision, by the way, is made by consciousness.
does not open from the decision-making side.
Grist for your thinking mill (reason)
- Why has free will been a mystery for thousands of years?
- Why is the free will answer (above) an absolute truth? (as noted above, it is not possible to claim knowledge of absolute truth for reason. However, in this specific instance, you can. Why?)
- Why is free will accessed only through consciousness?
- Why is it not possible to open the free will door from the decision-making side? (only consciousness opens the door)
Section Goal – Establish that the free will question is really simple, but only from the right point of view.
There Is Only One Way to Know That You Understand (and Possess) Free Will
It’s a problem. On the one hand, it is crucial to make this discussion about free will easy to process. Initially, for the vast majority of people, ideas must be accepted by their decision-making brains first, or, new ideas will not be examined at all. Individuals not accustomed to thinking about new concepts will likely, that is, accidentally, have their decision-making brain filter out things they cannot promptly process. Moreover, if the new information conflicts with what their decision-making brain already knows, then the new data may be flatly rejected. This is unfortunate and a challenge to fostering reason. Thinking is a hard and time-consuming process after all. The thinking portion of their brain is just not used enough by most individuals. It is therefore not automatically or routinely engaged.
On the other hand, it is also crucial to structure the discussion so that it is difficult to accept the discussion’s assertions at face value. This is the explanation for the paradoxical form of the statements on these pages. If people see the statements as paradoxical, then they will have processed them, and yet, have also recognized that the statements are seemingly in conflict with themselves. This should provoke the individuals’ free won’t. Then, the trick is to keep the thinking process about ‘free will’ moving so that the grand possibilities it eventually confers are realized.
Help another ‘see’
Demonstrate your complete understanding of free will by explaining your answer to another. See if you can convince yourself that they understand. You won’t be able to. At first, you will conclude that surely you can teach another. But you cannot. Then, when it is possible to explain to yourself why it is not reasonable to bring along another through explanation, and that the reason is related to free will, then, you may have achieved your own personal understanding of free will.
The question of free will, if thoroughly explored, is a gift to your freedom of conscious.
Section Goal – Raise the understanding bar. Provide the thinker with a tool for verifying their free will understanding.