Free Determinism
By Dr. Malcolm Stewart-Morris
This title is intentionally thought-provoking, as it seemingly describes a cognitive contradiction. However, similar to other phenomena of our time (such as quantum theory), attempting to resolve this conflict might lead to a deeper understanding. Let’s explore.
Take the blue pill or the red pill
Neurological research has revealed that many - and possibly all - human choices, while appearing uninhibited, actually occur in the brain before we become consciously aware of them. This raises the question: how can we claim authorship of our decisions if the brain seems to act before "we" do?
I propose the solution lies in the duality suggested by the phrase "my brain." What is the "my" in this expression? Clearly, we experience a sense of personhood, which a theologian might refer to as a "soul." However, this term lacks substantive physical definition. An argument could be made that the "person" who owns the body, including the brain, is an epiphenomenon of the organ itself. If I am fundamentally a brain, the "my" ceases to exist. Unsurprisingly, this idea finds more favor in neurological circles than theological ones.
Further, the human brain evolved within a physical environment. Decisions concerning gravity, temperature, and environmental conditions are managed at lower levels of our Central Nervous System, outside conscious awareness. The same applies to genetic and cultural precursors to decision-making, as well as the constant stream of unanticipated stimuli from our senses and cognitive receptors.
It seems the brain is perpetually bombarded by micro inputs, dictating sub-selections that eventually provide awareness with the building blocks for conscious decisions. Freud, often criticized, offered insights into these subconscious determinants, which contemporary neurological research increasingly supports.
While a strong case exists that our mental structuring could be "theoretically" determinable, we do not live within a theoretical construct. Similarly, those who propose that all universe data could be computable, making the future predictable, face the same limitations.
The conclusion, then, is that while "free will" may be illusory at some higher level, much of our human perception is also illusory. We are fundamentally incapable of grasping absolute reality and can only strive to understand the imperfectly determinable, let alone what is fully determined.