Free Will #1

I am fascinated by the problem of free will.  I can't think of anything more obvious to every human being: the sense that we can make decisions and that we are, at least to some extent, able to make choices about what we do and how we respond.  And yet, from a fundamental scientific perspective, there is really no room for free will and no reasonable explanation for it.  Many scientists now say that our senses deceive us and that we really don't have free will - we just feel like we do.

Free will is hard to define.  For the purposes of discussion here, I'm going to define it by simply stating one of free will's key outcomes:

Human beings, as individuals, are responsible for their own actions in a way that is distinct from every other living and non-living material thing.

This means that rewarding people when they do good, and punishing them when they do bad, is a valid thing to do.  Also, rewards and punishment carry importance beyond just as a "training exercise" (i.e. there is something fundamentally different about these actions when applied to a human as opposed to when they are applied to a dog).

There will be a lot more to come on this topic, but I wanted to start by putting up a poll about the most spectacular living thing in the known material universe:  the neuron.  They are the fundamental working unit of actions, sensations, and, as far as I can tell, all thought.  If a neuron doesn't fire an action potential, did it really happen???

Try this "experiment".  Put your arm out in front of you.  Now, move your hand either to the left or the right and hold it.  Which way did you move?  Why?  Where did the decision (left or right) arise?

[Note:  since I wrote this, I've realized that this is a pretty lame example and isn't a good argument for free will.  But I leave it here just because.  When it comes to my view of free will, you have to use examples that involve moral decisions that are deeply human and deeply personal.  Frankly, in the experiment above, which way you move is probably random chance and has nothing to do with your free will.  For more in-depth discussions, see later entries on free will and my series on the Theory of the Soul.]

Ultimately, the movement of your hand, either right or left, is fully encoded in the neural signals delivered through the motor neurons in your arm and upper torso.  And maybe some sensory neurons are involved too.  But the point is, I could reproduce that same movement in your arm by carefully stimulating the right neurons with the right patterns (actually, that's what I do for a living!).  My question is this:  how did the neurons in your motor cortex decide to move your hand either right or left?  Who told them what to do?  If you are a staunch materialist, then neurons can only respond based on the inputs they receive, so they must receive input from other neurons, which in turn must receive inputs from other neurons, and so on.  In that scenario, nobody decides, it just happens based on what has happened in the brain before and the environment around the person (the mass of sensory inputs coming in to the brain).

I say that can't be the whole story.  I believe there are at least some neurons...at least one neuron...that is influenced (not fully controlled, just influenced) by the "mind".  We can come back to the mind, but for now, suffice it to say that the mind (as I define it) is not a material object in any currently-understood composition.

So, try out the poll and add any comments you wish.  This is just a start to get you thinking!