Authors of Our Thoughts
( Thought experiment: Looking for free will )
Are we the authors of our thoughts?
Free will might not exist, but will does. There is a difference between letting the robot run its course, and monitoring and guiding it. We are the pilot of our body, or at least we have the potential to be. We can let it run on autopilot, or we can take control. Maybe the span between full auto and all manual is where the illusion of free will lives.
A choice we made can not be undone and can never be different, but what about the choices we will come to make? Can we choose to learn from our mistakes?
Imagine a script; of if's and else's, and weighted values. Given a specific input, the code always choose the same path. But if we monitor the process, debug it, and see what it did, we can change the weights, and make the outcome different next time. We just need to choose to monitor the system.
All this does however, is move the problem of free will one step up the ladder. To consciousness instead of thought and feeling. It gives an illusion of free will to the current scenario, by adding another authority to the decision tree. If we then look at that authority, we are back at the same problem. What controls the choice of the observer, and does that entity have free will?
We need to believe that we have the will to change things. And if we believe that, we can actually change? If we don't believe we can, then we surely can't? Believing... If free will does not exist, but believing it does can change our behavior, then it must mean we somehow have the internal code to change who we are, and how we act? We can not choose what we believe, they say; because we have no free will to do it? But our surroundings can give us believes, and change us. Why else would we go to see a psychologist? So we are changeable, the code can run differently, have different weights. But can consciousness change them? Is that where free will lives?
I think the problem of free will is also the phrase itself, that it makes little sense. The feeling of free will seems to stem from the fact that we can choose to do differently than what we feel. We can 'choose' compassion when overwhelmed by anger. I wanted to hit him, but i didn't; I choose not to do it. But is it an act of free will, or simply a result of learning? Of understanding causality?
An argument against free will is the seemingly emergent appearance of thoughts. We don't author them ourselves, it is said. In some way it makes sense to me. An example is when writing. I have always been baffled by how, when i write, it seems like the words spring out by themselves. Like they emerge from some kind of void within. In those moments I don't have an illusion that I choose what I write actively. It is more a sense that the words grow by themselves. On top of that there is this strange analyzing machine. The thing that makes me rewrite this sentence. Again. And now again. This strange sense that is looking for the right rhythm (consciousness? or maybe just making the text fit to my previous experiences of reading others texts?). Molding the words and sentences, until they express what I want. What does that even mean "what i want"?
Another example is the knowledge that I need to do something. Something in me actually wants to do it. But I simply cant. This kind of schizophrenic feeling, like watching myself. I can sometimes even hear my own thoughts telling me that I'm stupid. "Just do it, get started you idiot. It's just a matter of willing it enough!" Sometimes I try to trick myself; "When the clock is 16:00, I will start." creating small rules, that I hope the robot autopilot will react to. Sometimes it works. Then the question comes: What is it that makes me unable to simply do the thing. The engine won't start? You turn the key a couple of times, and it just sputters. You decide to give it a couple of seconds, and then try again. Still can't do it. My conscious mind can easily see the need and problems associated with not getting started. Is it just the strength of my will muscle that is too weak?
What if free will is a muscle? That needs to be trained, and kept in shape. You need to be able to manhandle the robot, when it gets out of line.
The other part of free will is freedom. Freedom is being controlled by conscious thought, not by impulses. Many people seem to think that freedom is being able to do what you feel like doing, but to be honest I think that is silly. It only feels like freedom, because it's easy. The path of least resistance. Freedom is being able to look at the machine that is you, and seeing what it does, why it does what it does. To allow it when it is useful, and guide it when it's not. To learn. Freedom is seeing that anger, lust, regret and hatred, all lives in the machine, and not in you. Seeing that it is confined to your body, and not you, and that you can simply vent it out.
"If you always control your feelings you are a psychopath" No, you are not. If you ignore your feelings you might be. Take a car; if you ignore the flashing warning light, blinking at you from the control panel, you are going to have a problem somewhere down the road. But panicking is obliviously not the answer either. But if you analyze it, and get to know what it means, you can be in control, you can control the situation, know if you can keep going, or need help. You can control yourself, and make the best decision.
You can control it, or is whether you do or don't also deterministic?
Free will somehow makes no sense, but will seems to. What then if we see free will as a spectrum instead. Then it might still make sense?
The fight for the free will to act differently than what our senses dictate.