[See here for introductory comments.]
I theorized
that the soul is composed of at least three major components that I referred to
generally as Afferent System, Efferent System, and Processing & Memory [see here]. This entry is about the Efferent
System of the soul.
The Efferent System
of the Soul: The Will
The
efferent, or "motor system", of the soul is basically what we might
generally refer to as "the will".
This is where free will is generated and implemented. The efferent system is where the interaction
between the spiritual "soul-world" and the physical "flesh-world"
happens. The efferent system is, at
least in my view, the most mysterious component of the soul and probably the
most mysterious thing in the entire universe.
To me, the entire mystery of the soul really comes down to this
component.
There are
at least two major parts to the Efferent System of the soul. One
part is the aspect that performs the mechanics of the
"spiritual-physical link."
Somehow the decisions made by the soul have to produce an influence on our
physical actions. How in the world is it
possible that some non-physical entity could impact what we do? In fact, as I've discussed elsewhere [here],
we can narrow it down much further: at
some point, this action has to affect one or more neurons in the brain. How? There will be a lot more on that in future
entries. The other part is the actual decision-making component. This component is the entity that generates
an uncaused cause [see here]. This is
the entity that generates a decision that is unpredictable, but not random.
And, just like the unity feature of consciousness [here], there is
nothing else in the universe (that we know of) that is like this. There is no other force or condition or
outcome that is not either "caused" or "random". As a result, it is impossible to come up with
an analogy without introducing human will into the analogy, thus creating some
circular logic. Some would say that the
uniqueness and downright craziness of thinking there could be something that appears random (i.e. unpredictable) and
yet is not random, should drive me to
doubt the idea of free will. But, as I have discussed elsewhere, for me, free will is a given - it is the starting
point - because I experience it moment by moment. I do not throw it out just because it is
conceptually difficult, if not impossible, to fully describe. I can't explain why bumblebees fly either,
but I see them flying so I don't entertain the possibility that "since I
can't make sense of it, they must not be flying."
I actually
don't know if it is right to call the efferent component, "the
will." There are a lot of terms
used for this concept, often poorly defined.
I think this component might also be analogous to what some refer to as
human "agency". Or, from a
spiritual standpoint, it might be proper to call it the "spirit" of a
person. Or even "heart." Whatever you call it, it is the seat of moral
responsibility. The existence of
"the will" is why we can hold human beings responsible for their own
actions in a manner different than a dog or a computer. The general direction of our moral
decision-making (what kind of a person we are), and the implementation of those
moral decisions, is established in this component.
How is "the
will" or "agency" established in each human? Are we born with it? Is it set by God or by random chance? This line of thinking, which ends with the
idea that you'd have to create your own self in order to have free will, is, in
my opinion, a very tough argument for libertarians like me to counter. It's a body blow that I have to absorb
because I can't answer that question. I
take some solace in the fact that the concept of God has the same issue. Did God create Himself? If not, then how did He come into being and
who decided what God's character was going to be like? When it comes to God, of course, we simply
say that God had no beginning - He always was.
There is no question that God has free will. So did God freely choose His character? There's no answer to that. I have an idea about the infinitesimal
"beginning" of our free will, but that will have to wait for some
future entry. But I don't reject the
idea of God because of this argument because, in many ways, this whole mystery
(how did God create Himself?) is exactly
what makes God, God. In the same way,
the conundrum of "creating yourself" is exactly what makes free will,
free. I like this mystery. To me it is exciting. More mysterious and exciting and even
"spooky" than quantum entanglement!
I will
just say one thing with respect to the question "are we born with
it?" in relation to our free will.
I think there are a lot of reasons to believe that this part of the soul
grows and matures, roughly analogous
to physical development. I think that
the maturing of the soul could provide an explanation for the "age of
accountability" for humans. This is
a common difficulty in raising kids. At
what point are they responsible for their own actions and should be punished or
praised accordingly? There is certainly
nothing that suddenly happens outwardly that indicates a sudden transition from
"not accountable" to "fully accountable." At some age, kids are "tried as
adults." We pick ages
(5...12...18...etc.) for this "transition" because we have no other means
of making a decision. Some kids seem to
mature quicker than others. And what
about kids with mental disabilities? These
are all good questions and a soul - specifically a "will" - that
grows and matures over time provides a framework for understanding how to address
these questions.
Remember
that in my theory of the soul, the efferent system is generally sparse, infrequent, and weak. This is partly what I was trying to point out
in "It's a Dog's Life." The
brain can run on its own without requiring input from the Efferent System of
the Soul, and, I think most of our life operates "physically." Thus, when we start digging into how the soul
actually influences the brain, the mechanics of this influence have to take the
"weak and infrequent" nature into account. However, when we focus on character qualities
that are uniquely human - say something like forgiveness or even altruism - we
expect the soul is involved. That's
where we should expect to see the action of the soul on the brain.
I'm going
to stop here with this initial description because this takes me back to my
purpose: to present a theory of the soul
that is consistent with neuroscience and scripture. The key thing is that the Efferent System of
the soul is the one concept where science could have real explanatory power. Specifically, I claim the soul exists in each
person and is influencing neurons (albeit infrequently). That concept can theoretically be subjected
to experiment. It is a repeatable
condition of every human being that is acting in the present day. Neuroscience will have a lot to say about how
and where this effect could or could not happen. This is in contrast to many other aspects of Christian
doctrine or even many other aspects of the soul. Many of the other important Christian
doctrines, such as miracles and/or history, are things that cannot be repeated
and they happened in the past, which can't be "rerun." I suppose the other Christian doctrine that
relates to the present day (i.e. not history) is the ongoing existence of God, but
that is very difficult to subject to experimentation! (Though I have tried - see here!)
And now on
to the third major component of the soul:
processing and memory.
No comments:
Post a Comment