Where there鈥檚 a will鈥� (Image: James Brickwood/Oculi/Agence VU/Camera Press)
OUR moral sense is based on an assumption so fundamental it seems unassailable: that we are masters of our own destiny. But the more we unpick the subtle knot tying conscious experience to the brain, the shakier that assumption feels.
Advertisement
The free will debate is an old one, but in the 1980s psychologist Benjamin Libet really stirred things up. He performed an experiment that revealed a signal in the brain moments before his subjects felt a conscious intention to move a finger. Although Libet鈥檚 work remains controversial, it raises a big question: is our unconscious brain really in the driver鈥檚 seat, with our consciousness a mere passenger?
Even if we鈥檙e driving, we may be on rails. Split-second life-or-death decisions 鈥� a police officer choosing to fire a gun, say 鈥� are often made too quickly for conscious deliberation to play a part. Instead, such choices may be guided by hardwired, unconscious bias.
What if a breakthrough in neuroscience stripped us of free will? One outcome may be a loosening of morals. In experiments, people behave more selfishly and dishonestly if they are persuaded beforehand that free will is largely an illusion. They are also more likely to treat wrongdoers leniently, offering a hypothetical criminal a shorter prison sentence than they would otherwise have done. It鈥檚 harder to ascribe blame to an automaton, after all. But these behavioural changes only last until the powerful feeling of our own agency reasserts itself.
On the other hand, belief in free will tends to be strengthened by considering a scenario in which someone acts immorally. of Yale University and his colleagues argue that our powerful belief in free will is bound up with a fundamental desire to hold others responsible for their harmful actions. In other words, belief in free will is required to justify punishment. And there is some evidence that fear of punishment is what keeps societies from breaking down.
Legal punishment for the purpose of retribution would make much less sense if the idea of free will were jettisoned, says at the University of Oregon in Eugene. But it might still serve a practical need as a deterrent. 鈥淛ust as we make efforts to avoid the negative consequences of other natural phenomena like hurricanes and rat infestations, so too can we make efforts to incapacitate transgressors to stop them causing further harm,鈥� he says.
So we would probably keep our legal systems in place. Faced with the prospect of punishment, our brains work to keep us out of jail 鈥� consciously or unconsciously.
The loss of free will may be a harder pill to swallow when things get personal and our emotions come into play. 鈥淭hinking about a guy being mean to your sister is likely to motivate people to reject that neuroscience breakthrough,鈥� says Shariff.
Knobe agrees. 鈥淚f people discovered that there was no free will, they would undoubtedly come to think very differently at an abstract level,鈥� he says. 鈥淵et research suggests this sort of abstract reflection would have shockingly little impact on the way people actually treated each other.鈥�
In any case, hanging on to a strong belief in our own agency has its upsides. It is linked to a greater sense of satisfaction and self-efficacy, higher commitment in relationships and greater meaningfulness in life. Free will is dead? Long live free will!
Read more: 鈥�10 discoveries that would change everything鈥�
This article appeared in print under the headline 鈥淲hat if 鈥� We have no free will?鈥�
