Limited Will

Choice-less Starting

Sometimes, at conception, parents choose to have a child. More often than not it just happens. Parents do not choose which child they will have, a genetic lottery selects which features will grow.

We do not choose who our parents will be.  After birth years pass before we even become aware of choice, much less those made by parents.  We do not choose the society we are born into, the planet we appear on, or even the star around which we zoom.

We are thrust into existence with out our intent.

After birth a long period of time passes where we are driven by simple responses to senses: emotional at best, instinctual at worst.  Our family, society and environment put upon us what we can learn, what we can know, providing a framework of what we can be.

The demands of being drive us until we finally become aware of our own existence, only gradually do skills develop allowing mastery of body and desire.


Life Divided

A third of our lives are dissipated in sleep.  Dreams only a small part of this unconscious portion of our lives.  Making choices within dreams can be a rare treat, a momentary fantasy of self control.

Eating consumes another thick slice of life; finding things to put in our belly, chewing and swallowing, seeking a place to relieve the unused excess.  These autonomous actions, rarely reach our conscious thought, much less require considered selection.

Taking pause to rest, even in the midst of our labors, it is healthy to let the mind wander a bit.  Day dreaming is the flip side to focus, a time to deliberately not act, to stay our hands from making choices become real.

Who among us chooses at each moment to make their heart beat, ears hear, or skin itch?  Indeed our bodies function mostly without mindful intervention.

Another piece of life is used putting on clothes, taking them off again, brushing teeth, grooming bodies, and maintaining the space to live in.  These actions are in the main conducted with wandering thought, by rote and habit.


Reality Intervenes

Living among others, we often find choice limited.  The needs of spouse and children, family and friends, even society at large limit the range of choices available.

Habits formed from expectations guide much of our time.  Listening to other's tell about their own thoughts is necessary to keep relationships healthy.  Caring for children and the aged demand attention from other choices that might be made.

Work demands action from us.  Boss or customer schedules toil where we attend and interact.  Plans made by others guide our activity.  We do what is required of us in order to gain those resources necessary for life.  Making a choice to work, is followed by many demands we do not choose.

Sometimes, the world intrudes in more harsh ways.  Accidents happen.  Government requires time to pay and then file tax.  Things wear out and break requiring attention to maintain our lives.  Natural disasters and weather can interrupt our intent.


Room for Will

The moments of choice that transcend our environment, ignorance, and emotion are small.  In a life of 80 years we are lucky to have but a few where our own will can be expressed.

The considered choices we are able to make, much less implement to our plans, are often so slight as to fade into insignificance.

Even the simple act of selecting from a menu at a restaurant requires we wait for the menu, scan the options, filter those that will not suit, and then, only then, make a choice about what we might eat.

Each selection made, each choice of will, requires two separate activities: assessment and decision.

Our choices begin by comparing our desires.  What of all our current wants should have a priority.  A part of the brain determines value of each, categorizing them by immediacy, risk, and reward.

We then must begin to consider potential actions, what could we do that might result in realizing what we want.  Picking which path might get us to the end of our desire.


Decision Fatigue

Deliberate acts based on the choices require effort and time.  Everyday we face small decisions both major and minor.

Our thoughts are occupied with comparing and choosing.  Rarely does this process happen instantly.  Different parts of our prefrontal cortex, our fore-brain, hold symbolic patterns, metaphors of desire, potential solutions, and determine choice.

Making choices wears us down.  We expend focus and energy.  With no nerves sensing the usage of our brain, we feel no fatigue, but the brain does tire from exertion. No matter how sensible we attempt to be, we can not make decision after decision without paying a biological price.

The more choices we make in a day, the harder each one becomes.  Like a weight lifter, we tire from the exertion.  As we make more and more choices, we start to look for shortcuts, even become reckless, are more prone to act on impulse.

Experiments have clearly shown that there is a finite store of mental energy available for exerting will. When people resist the desire to eat a donut, they become less able to resist other temptations.


Limits to Free Will

Even if we do not accept that our existence is pre-determined, that fate does not rule us, that our choices are not an illusion; our free will is fleeting at best.

Harsh environments, social, financial, and environmental, radically reduce our chances to prosper.  When our lives are full of hard choices, when we our focus must be on finding the next meal, the next place to sleep, resolving crises after crises, we use up our ability to create a better existence for ourselves.

When the affluent expect others to make choices like theirs, they assume others have the mental reserve to act as they do.  Picking one's self up by their bootstraps requires more effort than picking which stock to buy next.

Children gradually develop their ability to exercise free will, so we must help them make choices until are able to do it on their own.  This requires us to put aside our own choices for their survival.

Judging the success and failures of others, without being able to sense the energy expenditure of choice, is an illusion.  This does mean we have to accept their poor choices, but rather we ought understand they have limits to choosing.

When we choose to judges others harshly, we use up some of our own capacity to act with our own free will.

Prioritizing Freedoms

Illusion of Freedom

Are we free?  Can we be free?  Is freedom a given?  Or perhaps freedom is only an illusion?  Can any freedom not come at a cost to another?

One view of freedom

High above a police drone flies, camera pointing down upon a young couple as they skinny dip in a secluded park.

Buying a pack of cigarettes at the local gas station, purchase data is analyzed for poor health choices and insurance coverage denied.

Attending the start of school, a child’s hand is placed on heart and pledge recited while peers and teacher watch, ensuring compliance to accepted behavior.

Pushing a broom on Saturday, the Jewish laborer knows there will be no future employment for him if he does not.

Another view of freedom

Blowing his nose, the old man wishes he was free from the pain of allergy.

We use the word “freedom” frequently in our culture to mean that we are able to act on our will.  Our expectation of deeds without restraint leads us to believe we are at liberty to live our lives.

The reality is we are only free in part.  Actions have consequence.  Freedoms are not equal. 

Each thinking person finds their own view of how to live their lives.  Each living person is driven by causes beyond their control.  Freedom is a goal that may never be fully reached by all people, all the time.

Assumed Freedom

Our culture assumes we have some degree of free action.  Custom holds us responsible for deciding what we do.  Fate and destiny are assumed to be generated, at least in part, by each person.

We expect economic freedom to make contracts, buy and sell, and keep the money we earn.

We desire the freedom to worship or not as we choose.

We want to move freely about without interference.

We expect privacy in our persons and homes.

We demand freedom from harm; to protect ourselves, loved ones, and property.

We aspire to freely choose government and laws it creates and enforces.

We wish to make free choices for ourselves so long as no one else is hurt.

We insist upon speaking freely, to express our views, and join the public debate.

In all these cases, the independence of action, the ability to express our individual will is taken for granted.

Freedoms Conflict

Freedom during war is different

Each freedom does not exist alone.  They are co-dependent and conflict with each other.  The price of one freedom is often the limit upon another.

Our desire for protection causes us to desire police.  Giving police the tools they need to protect us limits our freedom of movement, our freedom of choice, and cost part of our economic freedom.

Our desire for pleasure has consequences on others. Smoking, gambling or drinking have a cost in resources beyond our own persons.  We limit our movement and privacy to ensure our pleasures do not harm others.

Our desire for lawful governance costs money taking away our economic freedom.  We give up our free movement to ensure regulated transport.  Our desire for protection from government means giving up privacy.  We limit our choices in order to allow the whole to prosper.

Our desire for freedom of speech allows bad ideas to be aired.  People with foolish thought or hostile intent can harm us all.  We limit our speech when it causes the society to suffer. 

Freedom in the Balance

Our balances of freedoms are the result of choices we make as a society.

We prioritize one freedom over another. 

Freedom during peace is different

Screaming “FIRE” in a crowded theater when there is none is forbidden.  Such speech is prohibited so that fear does not cause a stampede of injury.  Freedom of speech is sometimes limited for freedom of protection.

Unwarranted searches of our homes are not allowed so that we can maintain the privacy of our lives.  We sometimes value freedom of privacy more than freedom of security.

Not paying transportation tax is prohibited so that we can move more freely.  Moving about freely has a cost we sometimes value more than economic freedom.

We choose freedoms differently with circumstance. 

At one time we thought limiting the vice of alcohol was necessary for other freedoms to endure. 

Feeling our security was threatened in time of war, we limited economic freedom so that money and material could be directed to the soldiers and battles.

Freedom Struggles

Any one freedom can trump the others.  Each of us has a different view of how we prioritize freedom at any time.  When enough of us want one freedom to override another we can collectively make it so. 

Struggling to define the next freedom balance

The balance between freedoms is under constant change.  First one type of freedom will dominate then another.  Later a different freedom will become more important to us.  War, disaster, or even our dreams of the future change our perspectives and thereby our priorities of freedom.

At no time will freedoms be equal.  Trade-offs are searched for in each time and place. 

We use our politics and government to move the balance between freedoms.

Freedom is not an absolute.  Freedom is a balance between competing desires and needs.

Next time you say you are “free”, stop and consider what you mean by it.  Is “free” what you meant before?  Is “free” what you will mean again?  What new balance of “free” are you willing to make?


Be sure to subscribe to Philomeme!

I Gotta Goooo! Free Will?

Daddy.

You do what you
HAVE to do.

Daddy.

I gotta go now, please.

DADDY!

I Gotta GOOOOO!

If you have ever been on a road trip with a young child, words similar to these are familiar. The biological drive to eliminate bodily wastes is one we can control. Kind of.  Sometimes.  We are able to post pone it for a bit. With age and practice we may be able to 'hold' it longer. Eventually though, we must all heed natures call. When we get even older, our capacity to wait diminishes and the pressure can become greater.

Free will is like this. We have the ability to observe and choose what we do, only to a limited degree.

We do not want to go in our pants. We do not want to go in public. We want to go as soon as we are practicably able. We monitor our condition and suppress our urges when we can. We give into our urges when we must.  Our urges and our requirement to eliminate bodily waste is not a choice.  They just are.

We follow cultural conventions.

We would like to think, we are in total control of ourselves. Our society expects us to act in certain ways, restrain from doing unacceptable behaviors. Culture and parents teach us do do those things which are considered good and right. If we look closely at what we really are, we find a different case. Free will is often about when we do what we were going to already do. If you don't think this is the case, try to hold back your bladder for a day. Report back on your experience.

Occasionally our decisions, our free will, allows us to make big decisions that change the path of our lives or those around us. Should I marry her? Is that the right job to take? What classes shall I take in school? Some acts of free will have big consequences. We make a choice and it affects our potential futures.  Often these acts are only consequences of previous choices.  If I did not take that class, I would not have gotten that job and she would not have married me.

These kinds of big free will decisions are rare. The rarity is a good thing. Making life altering decisions every day takes a toll on us emotionally, physically and socially. Changing ourselves in drastic ways tears apart the social infrastructure that makes our lives simple and pleasant to live.

Previous decisions limit us.

Most decisions we make have little or no real impact on the course of our lives. Should I eat an apple or a pear? Do we watch this TV program or that one? Which pair of socks will I put on today? If you could take a step back from your life and observe it, you would find that these decisions are often based on habits of behavior. The trivial decisions are often pre-determined from previous decisions, our environment, or even just who we biologically are.

Free will is only an occasional choice in a particular moment, often with limited consequences. Humility teaches that most of the time, we drift by habit and expectation along an already chosen path.

Myth of the Makers (Part 3)

In this series we are examining the libertarian economic myth that a small number of people are makers and that the rest of the society are takers. It attempts to show that this world view is false and works against society, not for it.

In Part 3 we continue examining the list of assumptions about the superiority of the Makers showing in counter arguments how theses assumptions lead us to false ideas about how society works.

Without Makers Society Collapses

Backyard inventor.

It is true that not everyone can invent the next great thing. Not everyone is able to write new music. Most people are unable to design their own cars. But to suggest that only a select few can do these things is easily disprovable. We have an over abundance of makers.

There are many people who can and do invent. Most inventions are never monetized, made in a factory and reproduced for all. Inventions that never leave the garage, the kitchen table, the hobby room are purely for the local benefit of those who invent and there close associates. Human beings are in fact very creative in finding new ways to solve old problems. Steven Wozniak was not the only computer hobbyist who invented a personal computer.

Land of tinkering.

The number of talented garage and bar bands in my country alone is astounding. Every neighborhood has an aspiring string quartet, guitar hero, or closet rapper. So many more songs are written and performed than go public as to make us literally awash in musical talent. Madonna is not the only creative musical artist to write a catchy tune.

In garages and small commercial buildings all around the land are individuals and small groups who design their own vehicles. From three wheeled custom motorcycles to flying cars, our nations ability to develop new means of moving ourselves around boggles the imagination. To suggest that only Mr Ford, Mr. Oldsmobile, and Mr. Harley are capable of designing vehicles is obviously not so.

Robber barons showing self interest.

It is the access to resources that divides Steve Wozniak, Madonna, and Mr. Ford from the general masses. Many have tried and failed at achieving the level of success enjoyed by people like these. Some fail because of personal inabilities. Most fail for lack of access to resources.

As the Small Business Administration has documented, most business fail because of lack of experience, insufficient money, and poor location. They do not fail because of the people are incapable. Rather, they fail because they have not been given the room to gain experience, have access to resources, and being given access to the right location. Those who control the resources shut out those who do not, unfairly limiting their own competition.

Labor farmed by greed.

Makers know best how to use resources.

Makers make decisions about how to use resources for their own personal interest. Few makers choose to allocate their resources for the greater good. This self interest often leads to a depletion of a shared resources by individuals, acting independently and rationally according to each one's self-interest, despite their understanding that depleting the common resource is contrary to the group's long-term best interests. Makers must be monitored and restrained by society in order to ensure that the Makers self interest does not damage the whole of society. Selfish makers can hurt us all.

The idea that selfishness and greed are a societal good is clearly false.  It is an argument that tries to justify immorality as a virtue.

Those who would tell us that they should get all the results of 'their labors' are actually trying to confuse us.  Ayn Rand's philosophical views has been perverted by a new generation of robber barons.

The division of society in to Makers and Takers is mythic attempt by a few to take even more from the labor of us all.

First - Part 1 – Part 2 – Part 3

Myth of the Makers (Part 2)

In this series we are examining the libertarian economic myth that a small number of people are makers and that the rest of the society are takers. It attempts to show that this world view is false and works against society, not for it.

In Part 2 we examine the first few assumptions and counter arguments in more detail.

U.S. Wealth distribution.

Makers Create Wealth

There are three definitions of wealth: Things that make people better off, the value of things, and the total assets of individuals.

Not all wealth is about money. Wealth is also about life, liberty and happiness. Those who focus only on money as a definition of wealth are limiting the value that human beings have to an arbitrary counting system for their own benefit.

Billion dollar mansion
under construction.

The land a farmer hands on to his children is his wealth, not just the crops he takes from the land. The care a mother gives her children is her wealth, not just the money she spends on them. The labor we give to those challenged by natural disaster is often more about just showing up and lending a hand. Wealth is more than money.

The majority of the wealth in a society is not created by the individuals who control it.  Rather it is inherited.  Huge fortunes made in one generation are handed down from father to son creating an oligarchy of power.  The descendants of wealth benefit from the labor of others without providing in return.  Wealth is concentrated by family more than effort.

Obligation to give back.

Makers Act Alone

No maker became a maker without society. Without their parents Makers would not have been given the basic food, shelter, and clothing necessary to grow up. Without schools provided by the local society they would not have had the chance to be educated enough to become Makers. Without national society Makers would not be safe from enemies. Makers could not exist without the society they come from. Makers have an obligation to that society to return what has been given them.

Making is a team effort.

Most things that are made require many hands of effort in order for the thing to be made. No one Maker designs and builds the radio in your car. No one Maker plants, grows, transports, and sells his food unless they are in a small limited, local market. No one Maker builds their own factory by hand and runs it by themselves. Makers live in an interconnected society. To separate themselves from the society is to act against the society which created them.

Garage inventions

Few People Are Makers

Actually most people are makers to one degree or another. My mom was a maker of meals and households. My Dad made torpedo targets. My wife makes documents so people can learn to use tools made by others. My friend makes clean bathrooms and floors so we remain healthy and feel good about our environment. Each of these people make more than these things. All responsible people make things through effort of labor. Sometimes they are rewarded by money. Sometimes they are rewarded by love, or happiness, or life, or liberty. Almost everyone is a maker of some kind.

Makers Always Benefit Society.

Destruction of the commons.

Many people make things for bad ends, even on purpose. The strip club owner employees girls who may not make money otherwise, but drags down the potential of all the other daughters. The Heroin dealer makes money distributing a product that does evil. Cigarette makers do far more damage than good for society. It is difficult to find an argument why Swastika makers help people. Some makers can hinder society.

Lungs after cigarettes.

Most makers do have a positive good result in what they make. The products and services of many makers have negative side effects that can sometimes over weigh the good that they do. Even those without bad intent can do damage though. When the focus of the maker is on making money and not making good, makers can do great evil.

Next - Part 1 – Part 2 – Part 3

Myth of the Makers (Part 1)

At the heart of the conservative economic argument is the idea that a small number of people make things, while everyone else lives off their ability. These special few who are the designers, inventors and creators that provide the masses with goods and services. The libertarian view expounds that the general public should cater to the needs of these special few so that everyone else can benefit from the their genius.

The selfish man carries the
world on his shoulders?

The basic philosophy of the conservatives is based on the idea of the 'Virtue of Selfishness'.  It argues that  businessmen, innovators and builders are 'Makers'. 

Makers provide things everyone needs. Makers are superior humans due to their skill, talent, and force of will. Makers act in their own self interest using their genius,talent, and creativity to provide things for many other people. Makers add value to their community and are rewarded in return by money and power. When the society diverts resources from the makers, it is essentially an evil that will ruin all.

This view of selfishness as a 'moral good' has as one of its basic ideas that most people are not Makers, rather, most people are 'Takers'. Takers use the things and services given them by the Makers. Takers are inferior humans because they lack skill, talent and/or will. Takers act in their own self interest taking away from the makers, giving nothing in return; essentially stealing from the Makers. Takers drag down society and will ruin it all because they divert the resources of the Makers.

What selfishness means.

There are several assumptions to the Makers argument. They are:

1. Makers create wealth.
2. Makers act alone.
3. Few people are Makers.
4. Makers always benefit society.
5. Without Makers society collapses.
6. Makers know best how to use resources.

Every one of the assumptions about Makers can be challenged using reason. The concept of Makers and Takers can be dis-proven as rationalized myth. These stories about Makers serve only the purpose of allowing a few people with power to maintain that power. The myth of the maker is therefore propaganda.

Unselfish acts of labor.

Here is a brief list of the reasons the assumptions of the makers are false:

1. Wealth is more than money.
2. Makers have an obligation to society
3. Makers are in an interconnected society
4. Everyone is a maker.
5. Makers can hinder society.
6. Makers can do great evil.
7. We have an over abundance of makers.
8. Those who control the resources shut out those who do not.
9. Selfish makers can hurt us all.

Over the next two posts, I'll be examining each one of the assumptions about Makers demonstrating how the logic used in these arguments does not hold up to the facts of the reality we live in.

Next - Part 1 – Part 2 – Part 3

Just Be Claws

I caused my coffee to brew.

I got the beans out, ground them, put filter in pot.

I filled up the water, poured just the right amount.

I plugged machine into wall, turning it on.

I watched clear become my desire of dark, rich brown.

I caused the coffee to brew.

I did not grow the coffee.

I did not make the grinder, filter, or pot.

I did not make or lay pipes allowing water to flow.

I neither designed nor built the machine.

I was only a link in a long set of chains.

I did not cause the coffee to brew.

Normally we think of cause and effect as simple. Something is done that makes something else happen. A useful way to live in the day-by-day. Cause and effects usefulness betrays the more complex, the more subtle, the more beautiful of what the reality is.

Kitty Lust

Causes require connections. I open the tuna can, the cats come. The can and cats must be setup a special way in order for cause and effect to work. Each cat must be within ear shot of the opener or they do not know of the potential tuna. If the basement door is closed the feline returning from the litter box may be unable to reach the can in the kitchen. Most of the time, we do not think about the special setup that allows causes and effects.

Causes do not always have the same effects. My cats Pan and Dora run to the kitchen when I open a can. Do I cause Pan-Dora to run? The creatures smell food and follow their desire for tuna. The fact that I'm the one opening the can means nothing to Dora or Pan. If I allow them to gorge themselves on the tuna and wait a few minutes to open another can, they do not often come running again, rather lick their paws and ignore can, tuna, and me.

Dreams of my cats

Different things can cause the same effect. Sometimes, when I'm cooking dinner, I'll open a can of peas or carrots or maybe tomatoes. You can hear the cats come bounding from where ever they lay, claws on wooden stairs launching themselves with abandon to their hoped for treat. Most of the time the can opener is not opening something they want. But just on the off chance it might be, they come anyway.

Effects follow causes. I have never once seen the Pan/Dora run to the kitchen expecting tuna while I am in another room. Maybe, when away from home, if I left a web-cam in the kitchen, I could detect such behavior; but I'm pretty sure it would be a waste of time. It seems safe to say that without the cause of the can opening, the kitchen running does not occur.

Cats think they are in charge

Some effects have many causes. We have a little plastic mouse with a red beaming laser light for a nose. If I push the button between the mouses ears the laser light lands on wall and floor much to amusements of my pets. Pan especially likes it when the light leads her from room to room.  She runs with all her might chasing the red darting prey. Getting Dora to run to the kitchen where the cans are opened is no mean feat. I can get Pan to do it a half dozen times before she tires and just watches the light move about. The opening of cans are not required for the cat to run to the kitchen with desire.

Correlation is not causation. Sometimes I make tuna fish sandwiches and put them in plastic bags. When I take these bags out of the fridge and open them to eat, a cat in range will come to investigate the smell. This led me to understand that it was not really the can that drove the cat, it was the tuna. The can is merely a correlation. The furry creatures had connected the sound of the can opening with the oily satisfaction of eating fish. The idea that because you relate one thing to another does not mean that one thing is the cause of another.

This seemingly little distinction, that correlation is not causation, leads us to a totally different sense of justice when cause and effect are applied to the law. Our sense of justice is closely tied to our innate ideas of cause. If you break the law you will be punished. The words 'you break' point to the cause and 'punishment' is the effect.

We have law for reasons of causation

Consider the heroin addict who craves his drug like my cat craves tuna. His body drives him to acquire the drug. His desire overpowers his morality and he becomes able to make the mental leap that theft is a viable way to obtain the chemicals his body screams for. In this sense the addict has been driven to change his morality, his sense of justice by chemical demand.

We make assumptions about cause and correlations always with insufficient information. Can we say the addict is responsible, that he is the cause of the theft? Do we say the drug is the cause of the theft? Perhaps it was his mother who took drugs while he was in her womb that setup this chain of events? Or maybe the pusher who convinced him as a young boy that heroin was fun? Perhaps all are culpable, perhaps none.

Dora will often jump on the counter to look for tuna after I leave the kitchen. She knows that tuna was there and if I don't see or hear her jump onto the counter, there may be an unexpected treat. Dora also knows that if I find her there, or become aware, I will chase her down with a squirt bottle until fur is wet. Dora does not like wet fur. Not at all. When Dora wants the tuna, her desire often overpowers her sense of consequences. Sometimes I'm not around and she gets what she wants. Dora knows that the effect does not always follow the cause.

Human nature looks for the simple cause and the simple effect. Its useful, but not often accurate to assume the easy and direct relationship of cause and effect. So next time you judge remember to be 'just', 'be claws' it is the right thing to do.

Free Won't

My hand is poised by the handle of the coffee cup. I desire the coffee. I desire to prove I have the free will to not take the coffee. The competing desires hover in my mind, choice not yet taken.

Instead, my mind wanders to the heat death of the universe and the seeming deterministic end that with or without the coffee dissipates all into incoherence.

That cat only dies or not when observed. What then observes my hand near the handle of the coffee cup? Some Cartesian theater inside my head? Some probability wave collapsing in 100 billion neuron connections cohering into a choice? Have I already decided and am just waiting to observe the decision?

Photo By Roslyn

Whatever the mechanism, the observing appears to allow choice to be made. As a practical matter of existence in a culture with law and morality there is a common assumption of some degree of personal choice effecting actions. To argue against the existence of free will appears to take concepts like "responsibility" and slap them like a bad puppy.

I am left then with the lack of knowledge on the "how free will happens?" question. That region of our explorations where it appears thar' be dragons.

The action I take will have consequences unforeseen, but in the end-of-ends inconsequential. Instead I'll let that last sip of coffee go and brew some more.