Free Will: You Have It & You Don't

Let’s ponder over what Brian casually dropped in our laps in a tweet some time ago, but was asked about it on StarTalk in front of Neil…

Let’s ponder over what Brian Greene casually dropped in our laps in a tweet some time ago, then was asked about it again on StarTalk in front of Neil DeGrasse Tyson: "Free will is the sensation of making a choice. The sensation is real, but the choice seems illusory. Laws of physics determine the future." There it is, the eternal dance between free will and determinism, a tango so intricate that it makes your head spin faster than a quantum particle.

Brian Greene being asked about his tweet.

First off, let's address the elephant in the room with what I call an Echo Statement that Ayn Rand once said, “You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.” Irony, thy name is choice! We live in a universe governed by laws - gravity, electromagnetism, strong and weak nuclear forces. These forces play out in predictable patterns, so much so that if you're smart enough (or have a sufficiently powerful computer), you can predict the outcome of a particle collision or the path of a planet.

Have we inadvertently found “God?”

“If everything is predetermined, then anything goes, right?”

In the realm of philosophy, the question of whether adhering to the laws of physics diminishes the importance of societal norms and moral standards is an enthralling and thought-provoking puzzle. It mirrors the age-old query about the foundation of morality in a world devoid of divine governance, akin to the timeless “if God doesn’t exist” debate. In a round about way, scientists are perhaps uncovering what our ancient ancestors personified as, “God,” — the first scientific language.

There are those who posit that even if the cosmos unfolds deterministically under the sway of physical laws, societal regulations retain their vital role in upholding order, fostering cooperation, and safeguarding the well-being of both individuals and communities.

In contrast, others assert that in the absence of a higher moral authority, individuals are compelled to draw upon their own ethical principles and the collective consensus of society as their compass, guiding their conduct through the intricate terrain of existence.

But here's where it gets juicy and is likely our saving grace from complete moral collapse into robotic mayhem. While the laws of physics are like a cosmic rulebook, the players (that's us) are somewhat less predictable. We're a wild card. Sure, you can predict the trajectory of a baseball, but can you predict whether I'll choose chocolate or vanilla ice cream at the ice cream shop? Spoiler alert: it's always chocolate.

Brian's claim that "the sensation is real, but the choice seems illusory" is like saying, "I'm reading this book, but am I really understanding it?" It's the paradox of experience versus reality. We feel like we're making choices, and that feeling is as real as the nose on your face. But are those choices predetermined by the complex interplay of neural networks, genetics, and environment? That's the million-dollar question.

Here’s that conversation between Brian Greene and Neil DeGrasse Tyson

Let's throw in a mind-blowing fact here: Quantum mechanics, the most accurate theory we have of the physical world, is inherently probabilistic. It tells us there are multiple potential outcomes, and we can't know which one will occur until we observe it. This uncertainty at the heart of reality is like Mother Nature saying, "I'm not telling you everything."

So, if the fundamental laws of the universe are based on probabilities, where does that leave our illusion of choice? It's like being in a video game where the next level loads based on your previous actions, but you can't predict what's coming. Are we just sophisticated algorithms responding to stimuli, or do we genuinely author our destiny?

EchoSpectivism, a philosophy I developed, or perhaps the laws of physics told me to write down, nudges us to look at this conundrum through a reflective lens. It asks us to consider: what if our choices are both free and predetermined? An EchoSpectivist would say, "You're freely walking a path that's already been laid out for you." It's not about the destination; it's about the journey and how you dance along the way.

In the grand narrative of life, the idea that we're both free and bound is not a contradiction; it's a harmony. It's like jazz - there's a structure, but within that structure, there's room for improvisation. So, while the laws of physics hum the baseline, we're riffing with our choices, adding our unique melody to the symphony of existence.

Wrapping this up, whether our choices are an illusion or not, they shape our reality. They’re the brushstrokes in the masterpiece of our lives. And in this art, whether we’re following a script or improvising, the beauty lies in the act of creation itself. So go ahead, choose the chocolate ice cream, or defy expectations and pick vanilla. Either way, it’s your dance, your rules in a cosmos that gave you those options.

Because if “the Devil/Universe made me do it,” then none of us have to be accountable for our actions. So in the laws themselves, the human laws, a code of conformity is written, a script by the past voices for the current humans to follow. If anything, laws themselves serve as proof that we have free will, and that the beast needs a cage. So we created our gods, our laws, to tame the wild animal within.

By creating something greater than ourselves, we have tamed the beast. Without these moral codes of conduct, free will rules the land more than ever. Regardless, we still hold the freedom of choice to follow societal rules. Thankfully, most of us do.

Now, in a final EchoSpective thought: Who determined I should write this, and who determined you should read it? Are you compelled to write a comment? Is that your inner free will, an instruction from the laws of physics to do as it says, or a little of both perhaps?

This closing reflection invites you, the reader, to ponder the deeper layers of causality and choice. It’s a philosophical nudge, a subtle prod asking you to question not just the nature of free will and determinism, but also your role in this intricate dance of existence. Are your actions a solo performance orchestrated by your conscious will, or are they steps in a choreography written by the universe itself? Or, perhaps, is it a duet where both forces harmoniously coexist, each guiding and being guided in turn?