Do you believe in free will? How does belief in free will affect society?

This article explores the existence of free will and the impact of belief in it on society, discussing the positive and negative effects of a scientific understanding of free will on individuals and society. It also argues that a scientific explanation of free will will contribute to the long-term development of humanity.

 

In the movie The Matrix, machines rebel and wage war against humans. Humans cut off the sun to shut down the computers, which rely on solar power, and the machines choose humans as their new power source. The machines trap humans in a virtual world and force them to become the power source for the machines without realizing it. The protagonist, Anderson, is initially unaware of reality and lives as an ordinary software company employee, but through his illegal hacking activities, he meets Morpheus and others and opens his eyes to reality. The story goes on to show that Anderson is destined to become the savior of mankind, and he finally saves humanity.
However, the movie also features an old woman named Oracle. The Oracle, whose name means prophet, is the program that controls the virtual reality program called The Matrix, and she knows what will happen in the future. This is because no matter how real it seems, it’s computer code, and everyone knows what’s going to happen. But even in the face of the all-knowing Oracle, the saviors of humanity make their own choices and determine the future. This raises an interesting question. Did Neo truly choose his future out of free will, or was he naturally guided by the Oracle into the future of saving humanity? This question leads us to the question of free will, the question of whether humans choose their own futures.
The question of whether humans have free will is an important topic not only in science but also in philosophy. With the development of modern neuroscience, the idea that human behavior can actually be explained by deterministic theories has become widespread, and the social effects of this belief are being studied, so the concept of free will is currently undergoing a major crisis. This has led to many attempts in psychology and neuroscience to understand what free will is. In fact, many theoretical definitions have been attempted, but a simple definition is that a person acts freely if he or she performs a conscious action and attributes the cause of the action to his or her will. The word conscious is necessary because it cannot be an unconscious reaction. It’s obvious that the reaction of closing your eyes when the wind blows in your eyes is not voluntary. The attribution part is also crucial: if you don’t recognize an action as being the result of your intention, it can’t be said to be will-driven. The neurological understanding of unconditional responses can be supported, so this definition is compatible with common sense while still being sufficiently rigorous.
This understanding of free will, although it may diminish its sacredness in the eyes of some, allows us to understand it within the theoretical framework of modern psychology without worrying too much about its existence and allows us to explore its specific structure and behavior. However, another phenomenon that humanity will encounter when it comes to understanding free will from a scientific perspective is the effect that belief in free will has on people. If free will is understood too much in the framework of science, a deterministic worldview is likely to dominate. This is likely to lead to a sense of helplessness. This lethargy can lead to many changes in behavior when faced with a problem, and if the lethargy caused by the understanding of free will spreads throughout society, it can change the nature of society. Social lethargy can be seen in the despair of a people driven to despair by ongoing political unrest, and its destructive power cannot be ignored.
In fact, there are studies that have observed an increase in immoral behavior when subjects are given beliefs that deny human free will from a neuroscience perspective. While not to be overinterpreted, these studies show that understanding too much about our own behavior and thought processes has the potential to be detrimental to humanity. Some may be wary of this knowledge and advocate for a moratorium on such research because of its potential to undermine human dignity. This is similar to the human cloning debate in the life sciences. However, I believe that a more accurate understanding of free will will benefit humanity in the long run.
Of course, I have to admit that a scientific understanding of free will leads to a deterministic worldview and can make people feel powerless in the short term. However, even if psychology’s understanding of free will is correct, it doesn’t mean that an individual’s future doesn’t depend on choice. For example, if someone has a theory of human behavior, they can’t predict their own actions because their choices come after their predictions, and choosing to act contrary to their predictions would contradict them. It’s like trying to figure out which move to make in a game of rock-paper-scissors. If I predict that I will punch, then I predict that I will rock, then I predict that I will scissor, then I predict that I will punch, then I predict that I will rock, then I predict that my opponent will scissor, then I predict that I will punch again, then I predict that I will scissor again, then I predict that I will punch……
This theory of predicting behavior is circular when it comes to predicting your own behavior and future, so in the end, you are the one who determines your future. By clearing up this simple misconception, people will realize that there is no reason to be helpless. It is only temporary that some social depression occurs as the dignity that comes from the word free will is undermined. On the contrary, a better understanding of adaptive higher self-regulation strategies will allow humans to have a more efficient society.
Of course, some may point out that public misconceptions about knowledge are never easily dispelled. Indeed, 100 years after the birth of quantum mechanics, the uncertainty principle is still misunderstood, even by educated people, suggesting that public misconceptions about science are not easily dispelled. In fact, many people attach too much meaning to the word “nondeterminism,” which is used to describe the uncertainty principle, and it is often overused in irrelevant contexts. It’s true that misleading information is often disseminated in popular form, perpetuating misunderstandings.
However, in the long run, misunderstandings tend to be resolved, and it is absurd to abandon definitive knowledge about human beings because of a temporary depression. In Newton’s day, 350 years ago, there were very few people on the planet who understood the motion of objects. Today, however, everyone with a normal education knows about forces and motion. In the 350 years since the beginning of the orthodox theory of the natural world, we have seen a civilization that has made advances that were unimaginable when the theory was first formulated. Similarly, the understanding of human beings will serve as a springboard for humanity to reach higher levels, and should not be rejected by temporal factors.
As science invaded the realm of the traditional humanities, scientific explanations emerged to counter sophisticated abstract ideas. Soon, psychology and neuroscience began to explain even the most abstract objects of human will, and free will lost its mystique. People worried about the social repercussions of this, about the public’s feelings of helplessness and the loss of human dignity. However, if it is understood that the scientific explanation of free will does not indicate the meaninglessness of individual choices, it is not a problem at all, and in the long run, it will clear up misunderstandings and bring great progress to humanity.