I watched Dan
Ariely, behavioral economist and the author of Predictably Irrational, TED talk:
“Are we in control of our own decisions?”. It triggered a huge amount of my discussions
with people. Mine definition on our control over decision was so radical that
most just could not accept it. I spoke in favor that “our free will (and decision-making) is not only created by our conscious mind” but also by our
unconscious. Bottom line is whether it was ‘I’ that decided and no ‘someone else’! I strongly prop as a true that ‘I am’
conscious and unconscious part and my gens and cultural impact of environment
and more together in all I do, think, decide.
Most
people, due to their “background noise” (see my TEDx talk) generated by the philosophy of
RenĂ© Descartes (1596) believe that only conscious mind is a seat for our “free
will” decision. It is due to Descartes who clearly identified that the mental
and the physical—or mind and body or mind and brain—are, in some sense,
radically different kinds of thing. Therefore, only the mind ‘holds’
consciousness and self-awareness. It was supported by theology to impose
believes that Good and Evil—or God and the Devil are independent against more
pragmatic views of Blaise Pascal (1623). Pascal’s development of probability
theory and his ‘Wager’ were more systematical approaches and therefore closer
to pluralism, which is the view that there are many kinds or categories. This
last idea is also much more in accordance with Far East ‘Yin and Yang’
principle. The principle where there is always something Good in Evil and some
Evil in Good.
Back now to
my understanding of “free will”. According to David Hume, the question of the
nature of free will is “the most contentious question of metaphysics.”
Minimally, to frame “free will” would be in the ability of agents to have the
capacity to choose his or her course of action unconstrained by certain factors.
But animals seem to satisfy this criterion too, and we typically think that
only persons, and not animals, have “free will.”