The ability to predict a decision does not disprove free will
The answer is simple: no. It is perfectly possible for free will to exist without it requiring conscious deliberation. To understand how this works, it is required to rethink what 'consciousness' is. Consciousness is often portrayed as the faculty that allows us to actively participate in our thought processes. We reflect on various ideas and possibilities and finally assemble a conclusion, that we can then use to undertake a certain action. However, and this is the essential point: this is not our usual mode of thinking. Most of the time, we respond to our environment in an immediate and involuntary way. When your are going to get a cup of coffee, you don't consciously deliberate "Hmmm, it seems I have decided to get a cup of coffee. Are there any objections to this? It seems not. Well then, let's start to contract the relevant muscles to stand up and start walking, etc. ...". In fact, you just do it. Only after you got up and started walking towards the kitchen, you may consciously register "wait, there is still a used mug here; why don't I bring it along to the kitchen?". The earlier decision, taken by unconscious (but not necessarily irrational) processes, registered itself in your consciousness a few moments after the decision was first reached and action was initiated. Conscious deliberation then still allows you to intervene.
As a result, the original experiments of Benjamin Libet, nor later sophistications, have anything to say about the existence of free will. At most, they have something to say about the time it takes the brain to reach a decision, compared to the time it takes the brain to become aware of its own decision.
1) the intention to move (shown in the brain)
2) the moment you realise you are indeed moving your arm
3) the moment you can still stop the made decision
The results from those studies was that you can see point 1 already 2,1 secondes in advance in your brain, but that 0,7 s before you actually move your arm your conscious brain can still "veto" the action. (in this case moving your arm) This research also basicly proved the existent of consciousness, because the "veto" would be your consciousness then ofcourse. Interesting subject though! Lot of interesting research is happening in this field lately.
A person who was nevert thaugth to be polite and open a door for someone would not do it unconsciously. If you have been thaught to do so, it's more likely you will.
But when being thought that, you are implicitly making a 'free will choice' to do so for the rest of your future. That's also probably why routines are too hard to break; they are (already) 'hardcoded' in your brain. And someone like Dr. Phil must beat it out you
And it's not a disprove of 'free will', because it is about behaviour. And you make you behave in a certain way, making it part of you.
The real issue here is whether or not we have "conscious free will". See <a href="http://newempiricism.blogspot.com/2009/04/conscious-free-will-and-empiricism.html">Conscious free will</a> because if the "free will" is not conscious is it really "ours" or a reflex?
Comments are closed