Philosophy Paper 4
Hume’s solution to the problem of free will is a classic example of a compatibilism. His view is that the problem of free will arises from ambiguous definitions. He invokes two concepts: Necessity and Liberty. This is his attempt to remove the problem of ambiguity from the free will debate. For Hume it is a “matter of fact” that our concept of necessity arises from two objects or actions being regularly observed in conjunction. Because regularity is observed in human actions, Hume understands them in the same way he understands all other cause and effect relationships. Hume defines liberty in the following way: “a person P is free when the following condition is satisfied: If P choses to do the action A, then P does A.”. This description places a causal relationship into our understanding of liberty. With that deft move, he removed the need to appeal to a Cartesian Cogito and allowed for liberty without destroying determinism
I find Hume’s solution to the problem of free will unsatisfying. From our discussions in class, I gather that Hume dismissed the notion of a “self” because it cannot be directly observed. In his examination of liberty, this leaves a gaping hole. If P does not exist as a rational agent, then who or what is “choosing” to do action A, when P simultaneously desires and manages to do A? In his pursuit of a compatibilist view, I feel he lied about his hard determinist inclinations. Without a self, his description of liberty is mere semantic trickery.
In the ancient philosophical tradition I am taking a stand on a completely impractical world-view. The self is an illusory artifact of our neural network. It arises after the fact and creates justifications even if they are inaccurate. During the development of a human infant, new neurons are growing at a fantastic rate. The connections between neurons are multiplying even faster. The infant is hardwired with a few basic reflexes like grasping and sucking, but everything else only comes online as the neurons multiply and form connections. For example, episodic memory (or story-like memory about self) does not come online until the hippocampus finishes developing and starts forming connections to the rest of the brain at age three. Observations of the human development cycle have shown that if there is a breakdown in the hardware or a lack of stimulation at any of the crucial periods of development, certain attributes crucial to the identity of “self” get destroyed or never develops. Taking the neurological basis for a majority of what we consider autonomy and jumping forward to experiments done with adults, we start to see an interesting pattern. Behavior is often unconsciously influenced. Behavior that is unconsciously influenced is rationalized after the fact. Neural activity ramps up significantly in the motor cortex and the decision making frontal cortex before a decision is available to the conscious mind. From this I would surmise that what we understand as the self only exist when neural connections are made properly and remain intact. Learning is the process of the formation of connections between neurons. Learning requires exposure to the environment. All motivations are learned. Neural activity precedes conscious thought. Rationalizations are often made after the fact and do not always accurately reflect motivations. The self is an artifact of the complexity of our neural network, but the rationalizations and illusion of choice come into existence only after the purely cause and effect neural network has already done its job.
I find Hume’s solution to the problem of free will unsatisfying. From our discussions in class, I gather that Hume dismissed the notion of a “self” because it cannot be directly observed. In his examination of liberty, this leaves a gaping hole. If P does not exist as a rational agent, then who or what is “choosing” to do action A, when P simultaneously desires and manages to do A? In his pursuit of a compatibilist view, I feel he lied about his hard determinist inclinations. Without a self, his description of liberty is mere semantic trickery.
In the ancient philosophical tradition I am taking a stand on a completely impractical world-view. The self is an illusory artifact of our neural network. It arises after the fact and creates justifications even if they are inaccurate. During the development of a human infant, new neurons are growing at a fantastic rate. The connections between neurons are multiplying even faster. The infant is hardwired with a few basic reflexes like grasping and sucking, but everything else only comes online as the neurons multiply and form connections. For example, episodic memory (or story-like memory about self) does not come online until the hippocampus finishes developing and starts forming connections to the rest of the brain at age three. Observations of the human development cycle have shown that if there is a breakdown in the hardware or a lack of stimulation at any of the crucial periods of development, certain attributes crucial to the identity of “self” get destroyed or never develops. Taking the neurological basis for a majority of what we consider autonomy and jumping forward to experiments done with adults, we start to see an interesting pattern. Behavior is often unconsciously influenced. Behavior that is unconsciously influenced is rationalized after the fact. Neural activity ramps up significantly in the motor cortex and the decision making frontal cortex before a decision is available to the conscious mind. From this I would surmise that what we understand as the self only exist when neural connections are made properly and remain intact. Learning is the process of the formation of connections between neurons. Learning requires exposure to the environment. All motivations are learned. Neural activity precedes conscious thought. Rationalizations are often made after the fact and do not always accurately reflect motivations. The self is an artifact of the complexity of our neural network, but the rationalizations and illusion of choice come into existence only after the purely cause and effect neural network has already done its job.