Free will

Montague, P. Read

doi:10.1016/j.cub.2008.04.053

Cited by 43 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although moral responsibility is often described in relation to the notion of free will, which many consider to rely on dualistic ideas (Knobe, 2014;Montague, 2008;Bloom, 2007;Nichols, 2004), others suggest that folk conceptions of moral responsibility are not correlated with dualistic intuitions (Monroe, Dillon, & Malle, 2014;Nahmias & Thompson, 2014). Along the same lines, it has been claimed that neuroscience threatens neither the notion of free will nor that of moral responsibility and may, in contrast, lead to a better understanding of these concepts (Roskies, 2006).…”

Section: Why Dsf Writing Is Also Problematic Outside the Scientific Amentioning

confidence: 99%

“Me & My Brain”: Exposing Neuroscience's Closet Dualism

Mudrik

Maoz

2015

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract■ Our intuitive concept of the relations between brain and mind is increasingly challenged by the scientific world view. Yet, although few neuroscientists openly endorse Cartesian dualism, careful reading reveals dualistic intuitions in prominent neuroscientific texts. Here, we present the "double-subject fallacy": treating the brain and the entire person as two independent subjects who can simultaneously occupy divergent psychological states and even have complex interactions with each other-as in "my brain knew before I did." Although at first, such writing may appear like harmless, or even cute, shorthand, a closer look suggests that it can be seriously misleading. Surprisingly, this confused writing appears in various cognitiveneuroscience texts, from prominent peer-reviewed articles to books intended for lay audience. Far from being merely metaphorical or figurative, this type of writing demonstrates that dualistic intuitions are still deeply rooted in contemporary thought, affecting even the most rigorous practitioners of the neuroscientific method. We discuss the origins of such writing and its effects on the scientific arena as well as demonstrate its relevance to the debate on legal and moral responsibility. ■

show abstract

Section: Why Dsf Writing Is Also Problematic Outside the Scientific Amentioning

confidence: 99%

“Me & My Brain”: Exposing Neuroscience's Closet Dualism

Mudrik

Maoz

2015

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Belief in free will and locus of control are strongly correlated [9] and conceptually related: without a belief in free will it is more difficult to attribute control to oneself. The decline of these beliefs coincides with the popularization of insights from neuroscience, for example the famous Libet experiments [12] which conclude that free will is an illusion [13,14]. Neuroscience experiments by Libet and others–the so-called ‘willusionists’ [15], demonstrate that information about brain activity can be used to predict decisions before the decision-maker becomes aware of making a decision.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Free to help? An experiment on free will belief and altruism

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How does belief in free will affect altruistic behavior? In an online experiment we undermine subjects’ belief in free will through a priming task. Subjects subsequently conduct a series of binary dictator games in which they can distribute money between themselves and a charity that supports low-income people in developing countries. In each decision task, subjects choose between two different distributions, one of which is more generous towards the charity. In contrast to previous experiments that report a negative effect of undermining free will on honest behavior and self-reported willingness to help, we find an insignificant average treatment effect. However, we do find that our treatment reduces charitable giving among non-religious subjects, but not among religious subjects. This could be explained by our finding that religious subjects associate more strongly with social norms that prescribe helping the poor, and might therefore be less sensitive to the effect of reduced belief in free will. Taken together, these findings indicate that the effects of free will belief on prosocial behavior are more nuanced than previously suggested.

show abstract

“…Neuroscientist Read Montague puts it starkly: "Free will is the idea that we make choices and have thoughts independent of anything remotely resembling a physical process. Free will is the close cousin to the idea of the soul-the concept that 'you', your thoughts and feelings, derive from an entity that is separate and distinct from the physical mechanisms that make up your body..... Consequently, the idea of free will is not even in principle within reach of scientific description" ( [11]: R584). Benjamin Libet similarly assumes that free will requires that "conscious decisions can proceed to some degree independently of natural determinism [...…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Indeed, this prediction is borne out, at least as far as I can tell: compatibilists and 'hard determinists' (who believe we do not have LPs but we do have CPs) do not behave any worse than non-naturalists who believe we do have LPs. 13 11 These confusions are exemplified by the common practice of misinterpreting determinism to entail fatalism. Even Baumeister et al make this mistake when they write, "to the lay determinist, everything that happens is inevitable, and nothing else was possible ... [and] there are no counterfactuals" (2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Why ‘Willusionism’ Leads to ‘Bad Results’: Comments on Baumeister, Crescioni, and Alquist

Nahmias

2009

Neuroethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on results discussed in the target article by Baumeister et al. (1), I argue that the claim that the modern mind sciences are discovering that free will is an illusion ("willusionism") is ambiguous and depends on how ordinary people understand free will. When interpreted in ways that the evidence does not justify, the willusionist claim can lead to 'bad results.' That is, telling people that free will is an illusion leads people to cheat more, help less, and behave more aggressively, but these responses may be based on people's interpreting willusionist claims to mean that they lack the powers of rational choice and self-control. ] are appropriately modest about what psychology can contribute to debates about free will, not because they don't have much to contribute to those debates-they do. Rather, they understand that it is not obvious how people do, or should, understand the concept of free will and that, in part because of this, scientific discoveries can inform debates about free will only to the extent that we are clear about which conception of free will is at issue. Baumeister et al. offer us a particular conception of free will that is naturalistic and useful. Useful because scientific discoveries about human decision-making and selfcontrol, such as those offered in the research they discuss, can help to explain how such free will works, what its limits are, and even how it might be developed. Many other scientists work with a conception of free will that is non-naturalistic. With that conception in mind, they suggest that scientific discoveries about human decision-making explain away free will, suggesting that it is an illusion.Rather than use Baumeister et al.'s article as a target of my criticisms, I will instead draw on its main points in order to develop some criticisms against these other scientists who suggest they are showing that free will is an illusion. By considering the different ways philosophers, scientists, and laypersons understand free will, we can see why such scientific claims about free will may have significant ethical and social ramifications.

show abstract

Free will

Cited by 43 publications

References 4 publications

“Me & My Brain”: Exposing Neuroscience's Closet Dualism

“Me & My Brain”: Exposing Neuroscience's Closet Dualism

Free to help? An experiment on free will belief and altruism

Why ‘Willusionism’ Leads to ‘Bad Results’: Comments on Baumeister, Crescioni, and Alquist

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About