I can imagine the groans right now based on the title, alone. I considered an attempt to be clever and use somoething like; Fruit Fly Free -Will Finding Far Fetched or Fetching? (Now say that three times really fast). I better stop before you stop reading and miss the reason why I posted this!
Go to any philosophy chat room or religion and beliefs room and odds are this debate will be circling at least once on any given day. I use the circle because it is never resolved and the same arguments are cycled through repeatedly. I've not ever joined either side because I don't believe it is an either or situation. Moreover, the middle position I’ve argued since I was 18 and first butted heads with a Philosophy Professor, now seems to finally have a little nudge of credibility from the scientific community!
I have contended for 30 years that it is not a distinct choice between the two, but a debate over how much of each aspect is involved. I believe we have free will within the confines of limited parameters of physical existence. The physical properties of the universe, our earth, our biological composition including genetic variables and our physiologic mortality and our place and time in the world predetermine certain choices. I assert they do not control all of them.
Yesterday I found an article that suggests there is some evidence to support that a creature we do not generally consider capable of having any free will, may indeed possess at least a “spark” of it. I have always thought it absurd to mete out judgment or punishment of people if they had no free will in their decisions, and believe it equally absurd to condemn things for which there is no free will whatsoever. It feels good today to have discovered some validation for my belief on this matter.
http://www.livescience.com/animals/070515_fruitfly_freewill.html
This is an excerpt from the above article:
"Free will is essentially an oxymoron-we would not consider it 'will' if it were completely random and we would not consider it 'free' if it were entirely determined," Brembs said. In other words, nobody would ascribe responsibility to one's actions if they were entirely the result of random coincidence. On the other hand, if one's actions were completely determined by outside factors such that no alternative existed, no one would hold that person responsible for them."We speculate that if free will exists, it is in this middle ground" between randomness and determinism "that is currently not well understood or characterized," said mathematical biologist George Sugihara at the University of California, San Diego.
This article also makes important points about certain dysfunctions that create difficulty with self-control or impulse control. If human physiology is acknowledged to have such dysfunctions then by default that is an assertion we have ability to control our will as a part of our genetic blueprint. Free will within limited parameters is what our biology shows, philosophy must catch up.
I see this as no more different than the nature vs. nurture argument over personality or IQ that was once as polarized but over time with new evidence, now focuses on the realization that it is both.
Shalom,
Malkah
Go to any philosophy chat room or religion and beliefs room and odds are this debate will be circling at least once on any given day. I use the circle because it is never resolved and the same arguments are cycled through repeatedly. I've not ever joined either side because I don't believe it is an either or situation. Moreover, the middle position I’ve argued since I was 18 and first butted heads with a Philosophy Professor, now seems to finally have a little nudge of credibility from the scientific community!
I have contended for 30 years that it is not a distinct choice between the two, but a debate over how much of each aspect is involved. I believe we have free will within the confines of limited parameters of physical existence. The physical properties of the universe, our earth, our biological composition including genetic variables and our physiologic mortality and our place and time in the world predetermine certain choices. I assert they do not control all of them.
Yesterday I found an article that suggests there is some evidence to support that a creature we do not generally consider capable of having any free will, may indeed possess at least a “spark” of it. I have always thought it absurd to mete out judgment or punishment of people if they had no free will in their decisions, and believe it equally absurd to condemn things for which there is no free will whatsoever. It feels good today to have discovered some validation for my belief on this matter.
http://www.livescience.com/animals/070515_fruitfly_freewill.html
This is an excerpt from the above article:
"Free will is essentially an oxymoron-we would not consider it 'will' if it were completely random and we would not consider it 'free' if it were entirely determined," Brembs said. In other words, nobody would ascribe responsibility to one's actions if they were entirely the result of random coincidence. On the other hand, if one's actions were completely determined by outside factors such that no alternative existed, no one would hold that person responsible for them."We speculate that if free will exists, it is in this middle ground" between randomness and determinism "that is currently not well understood or characterized," said mathematical biologist George Sugihara at the University of California, San Diego.
This article also makes important points about certain dysfunctions that create difficulty with self-control or impulse control. If human physiology is acknowledged to have such dysfunctions then by default that is an assertion we have ability to control our will as a part of our genetic blueprint. Free will within limited parameters is what our biology shows, philosophy must catch up.
I see this as no more different than the nature vs. nurture argument over personality or IQ that was once as polarized but over time with new evidence, now focuses on the realization that it is both.
Shalom,
Malkah
P.S. In case you were wondering, there was no particular reason why I put that cute little mouse face up there over this particular article other than I thought it was cute. And I had the free will to do it.
No comments:
Post a Comment