Free will or a trick of the mind?

Nonfiction literary compositions

Moderator: The Madame X

Free will or a trick of the mind?

Postby The Madame X » Wed Nov 12, 2008 10:40 am

Causality Buffers: Layers of Abstraction
by expat4cebu Nov 4, 2008


In my freewill-versus-determinism debates, my belief in free agency
often comes up against the following objections or assertions:



* Everything is physical, including mind, and entirely controlled by
causality
* Brain activity is physical activity, so the mind – whether or
not it is abstract – is wholy a product of physical activity and,
thus, is entirely controlled by causality
* Free agency is just a theory
* Freewill is an illusion

I will address all these objections/assertions, below.

First of all, "everything" is NOT physical. The only way to
achieve compliance with that assertion is to toss out all the
dictionaries and substitute your own personal definitions. These kinds
of semantic rationalizations are common in debate and even casual
conversation. The assertion that mind is physical is just plain wrong.
It is clearly NOT physical. The BRAIN is physical but the mind is an
abstraction. The abstract, subjective and intangible properties of mind
are included in all the definitions of mind I can find. By denying the
abstract nature of mind, one changes its definition. Look it up for
yourself. Here's what Wikipedia has to say:


Mind collectively refers to the aspects of intellect and consciousness
manifested as combinations of thought, perception, memory, emotion, will
and imagination; mind is the stream of consciousness. It includes all of
the brain's conscious processes. This denotation sometimes includes, in
certain contexts, the working of the human unconscious or the conscious
thoughts of animals. "Mind" is often used to refer especially to the
thought processes of reason. The mind is a model of the universe built
up from insights. Thoughts of the mind fall into 2 categories: 1)
Analysis of past experience with the purpose of gaining insight for use
within this model at a later date; and 2) Simulations of future
scenarios using existing insights in the mind model in order to predict
outcomes. A mature mind has assimilated many insights and understands
cause and effect. When insight is not subordinate to a validation
discipline like the Randomized controlled trial, fallacious thinking can
result in a confused mind. A "common" or "world" mind refers to minds
that are in exchange of ideas and insights with each other and form
similar conclusions about cause and effect. Through the form of books
and other media, minds from the past are able to communicate their
insights about cause and effect to present and future minds.

There are many theories of the mind and its function. The earliest
recorded works on the mind are by Zarathushtra, the Buddha, Plato,
Aristotle, Adi Shankara and other ancient Greek, Indian and Islamic
philosophers. Pre-scientific theories, based in theology, concentrated
on the relationship between the mind and the soul, the supernatural,
divine or god-given essence of the person. Modern theories, based on
scientific understanding of the brain, theorize that the mind is a
phenomenon of the brain and is synonymous with consciousness.

The question of which human attributes make up the mind is also much
debated. Some argue that only the "higher" intellectual functions
constitute mind: particularly reason and memory. In this view the
emotions - love, hate, fear, joy - are more "primitive" or subjective in
nature and should be seen as different from the mind. Others argue that
the rational and the emotional sides of the human person cannot be
separated, that they are of the same nature and origin, and that they
should all be considered as part of the individual mind.

In popular usage mind is frequently synonymous with thought: It is that
private conversation with ourselves that we carry on "inside our heads".
Thus we "make up our minds," "change our minds" or are "of two minds"
about something. One of the key attributes of the mind in this sense is
that it is a private sphere to which no one but the owner has access.
No-one else can "know our mind." They can only interpret what we
consciously or unconsciously communicate.



The emphases are mine. This excerpt confirms the abstract nature of
mind and hints at the mental feedback mechanism I'll be advocating
later, below.

ANYTHING abstract is, by definition, non-physical. The mind is abstract
but is nonetheless real. Other abstractions are: art, love, fiction,
democracy, freedom, justice and music. Being abstract doesn't mean it's
not real: only that it's intangible. In the words of LSD guru, Timothy
Leary: "Even illusions are real: they're real illusions".

The mind is an intangible abstraction of the brain. The mystery of mind
is a closely held secret. Science is slowly but surely picking the
brain apart but is not much closer to explaining consciousness itself.
Our quest for understanding is still in its early stages: I readily
admit that any theory of consciousness is, for now, conjecture.

Human intelligence is a higher form of consciousness than found
elsewhere. I believe higher brain function in humans has crossed a
threshold. That threshold is mental feedback. The biofeedback machine
provides demonstrable proof of this mental (mind/brain) feedback
mechanism. This confirmation of a mental feedback mechanism also
suggests free agency is not outside the bounds of scientific inquiry.
Consciousness may be a tough nut to crack but it's certainly within the
purview of science to investigate, if not solve.

With biofeedback, science has revealed a clue to human consciousness but
hasn't yet explored its ramifications. At this point, I need to explain
how the ramifications of biofeedback (which is actually mental feedback)
relate to free agency and freewill.

But first, I want to lay a little groundwork and assert a key physical
difference between animate and inanimate matter.

I don't deny the universal application of causality (above the quantum
level). What I claim is that causality is not predictable with living
beings in the same way it is with inanimate things. For instance, a
head-on car crash takes just a moment: the energy released crumples
metal and sends a sound wave out in all directions. Physically, this is
not significantly different than a pair of meteors colliding (except for
the sound waves). However, the living occupants of the car (recognizing
an impending collision) may brace themselves for impact; they may writhe
in pain until sedated by a paramedic; they may crawl out from the
wreckage or they may die. Inanimate matter doesn't understand causality,
so it can't brace for impact. Inanimate matter doesn't feel pain or die
because it's not alive. This difference is important because it
establishes life as a unique mode of physical existence based on
motility and mind: animate versus inanimate. Particularly with man,
this distinction shows that mind and motility allows living things to
react to cause and effect in unpredictable and capricious ways (compared
to inaminate objects).

With life, humans reign supreme . . . or at least, unique. We possess
self-aware intelligence: an absolutely essential component of free
agency. Free agency is, essentially, the ability to exercise freewill.
Being self-aware means understanding causality. We know who our parents
are and that we will all die. We know the forces of nature and how to
harness them. We know causality. But knowledge is not enough to
establish freewill if we can't use it as we see fit.

If we're just a collection of molecules, how can we really do what we
want – instead of what causality forces on us? If we are merely
matter, like the rest of the universe, how can we rise above causality?
Obviously, if we are merely matter, we CAN'T rise above causality.

Our flesh tears and ages. Our bones break. Our brains are subject to
damage and disease. All our physical parts are subject to the inexorable
tide of causality. But humans are NOT merely matter. We're also mind.
"So what?", you may well ask. "The mind is entirely a product of
physical brain activity, so it's also entirely subject to causality,
just as the brain is. Right?"

That's an assumption which flies in the face of experience. We all live
as if we have freewill. We work, play and plan as if we have freewill.
The fact is, consciousness is still a mystery and can't be
scientifically explained by a deterministic model which is not even
falsifiable. I say free agency agrees with experience better than
determinism does and explains our abilities and achievements better
also. Free agency is implied in our language, by our achievements and
by our behavior.

As I've argued thus far, mind, of itself, is not enough to loosen the
grip of causality. Just because the mind is abstract doesn't mean it can
avoid causality's tyranny. To do that, the mind would need a measure of
independence: it would need to be able to direct the very brain which is
its source. That seems unlikely, even incredible. But that's exactly
what does happen. We exercise mind over matter (brain) by means of a
feedback loop between mind and brain. We all have a feedback mechanism
that enables freewill and free agency. With this feedback mechanism, we
have a modest freedom from causality because the feedback mechanism,
like the mind, is abstract – not physical – and operates (in at
least a limited way) outside the physical realm of causality. In other
words, the abstract nature of mind is a buffer from causality which
allows us to intelligently use our own brains to exercise freewill, via
a mental feedback mechanism which is, itself, an abstraction from an
abstraction (mind).

Biofeedback machines demonstrate this mental feedback mechanism but
don't explain it. I think that, with self-aware human intelligence, the
mind/brain feedback loop, in a synergistic symbiosis, achieves a sort of
critical mass that crosses a threshold endowing the mind with some
control over the brain. The abstract mind is a product of the physical
brain but the feedback mechanism (also abstract) may arise, as a state
shift, from the mind. Just as music is a creative abstraction from an
abstraction (mind), so is the feedback mechanism. I believe these layers
of abstractions serve to buffer our intelligent minds from physical
causality enough to give us free agency.

The Wikipedia description of mind, excerpted above, contains the
following words:

In popular usage mind is frequently synonymous with thought: It is that
private conversation with ourselves that we carry on "inside our heads".
Thus we "make up our minds", "change our minds" or are "of two minds"
about something.

These colloquialisms are all metaphors for the mental feedback
mechanism. Such language tacitly recognizes our mental feedback –
even if we're not consciously aware of such a mechanism.

I know this theory of free agency is largely conjecture: but so is
determinism or any theory of consciousness. However, (unlike
determinism) my theory of free agency has the advantage of being
falsifiable: if the mind does NOT have a feedback mechanism with the
brain, then the whole theory is shot down in flames.

Because the mind – and the mental feedback mechanism it spawns –
are both non-physical abstractions, they have no physical properties
which causality can directly affect: they have no matter or moving parts
or heat or light or gravity or inertia. The mind can only be indirectly
affected by causality, via the brain and body (our 5 senses). If the
mental feedback mechanism is truly a product of the mind – an
abstraction from an abstraction – then it is doubly buffered from
causality. I believe this is enough to grant us free agency and
freewill.
User avatar
The Madame X
Member / Matriarch
 
Posts: 7268
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 10:48 am
Location: Portugal / NJ US

Return to Articles (for the Outer Circle)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

cron