We use the idea of 'free will' in our daily lives, politics, the justice system, economics, religion etc. and also
the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory assumes an observer with 'free will'.
However, it is not difficult to see that it is a flawed concept (left as an exercise to the reader).
Perhaps Schopenhauer said it best: I can do whatever I want, but I cannot want what I want.
But on second thought (!) it becomes clear that the terms "will", "want" and "I" are not even well defined.
We do not have a theory that would explain our conscious (or unconscious) experiences, but we assume a direct connection between the activity of our brain(s) and our state of mind(s). However, this assumption also suffers from an obvious flaw: If our brains consist of molecules, electric fields etc. then physics should describe all of its properties. Obviously, physics does not contain anything that would describe our feelings or what has been called 'qualia'. Even if we would have a complete description of a dog's brain, we would not know what it feels like to be a dog ... this is of course known as the 'hard problem of consciousness'
------
Immanuel Kant, concluded that we have to live "as if" we have free will.
We all live "as if" life has meaning ... and I write "as if" somebody is reading this.
No comments:
Post a Comment