Libertarianism

Angela Sirigu

• Researcher at the French National Centre for Scientific Research - centre for cognitive neuroscience

• Argues against biological determinism through cognitive neuroscience

• 2003 did an experiment to refine Libelts experiment

• They studied patients with damage in the parietal cortex (region in the back of the brain that is involved in decision making) showed that the sensation of deciding occurred at the same time as the movement itself

• The damage meant there was no interval between the awareness of making a choice and performing the action

• The team proposed that unconscious planning and awareness of a decision to act occur as part of a processing loop that involves the parietal cortex

CROSS OVER

• The two studied the part of the brain where intentions are formed to try and understand the connection between intention to act and awareness that an action has been performed.

• Performed experiments on 7 patients who were undergoing brain surgery to remove tumors that were not in regions of the brain the team wanted to test.

• The patients were all awake during the surgery and could answer questions.
  In each case, different regions of the brain were stimulated with an electrical current and the results were observed

• When the premotor cortex, which controls behaviour was electrically stimulated, patients made complex physical movements without being aware. The stronger the stimulation, the more complex the movements.

  In contrast, stimulation of the parietal cortex led to patients to feel a desire to move. When the stimulation was stronger, they even believed they had moved. These patients spontaneously used terms like "will" or "desire" to describe their intentions, showing that the parietal cortex influences the feeling of voluntary movement.

SO

• These experiments suggest that both the parietal and premotor cortices work together to create movement. The parietal cortex seems to predict movements and sends instructions to the premotor cortex, which controls the actual movement. The outcome of the movement is then confirmed by the parietal cortex, leading to the feeling that we are the authors of our own actions.

• People claimed they had found the location of free will but that wasn’t there aim

• Since this research is based on an understanding of causes that operate on the brain, it seems likely that these findings are more useful for determinists

BUT

• It shows that the experience of decision making is a real brain event, not an illusion, and could therefore imply that an individual can be held morally responsible for their actions if both their parietal cortex and premotor cortex are functionally normally.

Michel Desmurget

• French researcher and writer specializing in cognitive neuroscience

• His research Covers the effects that television and exposure to screens can produce on our health and cognitive development

Benjamin Libet

• Was an American neuroscientist who was a pioneer in the field of human consciousness

• Benjamin Libet in the 1980s monitored the brain activity associated with a decision to move a wrist, using electrodes placed on the subject's scalp.

• He discovered that unconscious brain activity could be detected before the participant made a conscious decision to move.

• Because movement was triggered by unconscious brain activity before the participant had knowingly willed it

• Can be used to suggest that our apparent choice-making is just a link in a chain of cause and effect

CROSS OVER

• The two studied the part of the brain where intentions are formed to try and understand the connection between intention to act and awareness that an action has been performed.

• Performed experiments on 7 patients who were undergoing brain surgery to remove tumors that were not in regions of the brain the team wanted to test.

• The patients were all awake during the surgery and could answer questions.
  In each case, different regions of the brain were stimulated with an electrical current and the results were observed

• When the premotor cortex, which controls behaviour was electrically stimulated, patients made complex physical movements without being aware. The stronger the stimulation, the more complex the movements.

  In contrast, stimulation of the parietal cortex led to patients to feel a desire to move. When the stimulation was stronger, they even believed they had moved. These patients spontaneously used terms like "will" or "desire" to describe their intentions, showing that the parietal cortex influences the feeling of voluntary movement.

SO

• These experiments suggest that both the parietal and premotor cortices work together to create movement. The parietal cortex seems to predict movements and sends instructions to the premotor cortex, which controls the actual movement. The outcome of the movement is then confirmed by the parietal cortex, leading to the feeling that we are the authors of our own actions.

• People claimed they had found the location of free will but that wasn’t there aim

• Since this research is based on an understanding of causes that operate on the brain, it seems likely that these findings are more useful for determinists

BUT

• It shows that the experience of decision making is a real brain event, not an illusion, and could therefore imply that an individual can be held morally responsible for their actions if both their parietal cortex and premotor cortex are functionally normally.

Quantum mechanics

• Any scientific account of free will must focus on the empirical world - must include the human brain as a physical object

• There is evidence to support universal causation - idea that everything is subject to external causes

• The work of Quantum mechanics shows that Determinism may be false.

• Quantum mechanics is the investigation of matter on a very small scale and shows unpredictability and randomness within nature at this level.

• Might demonstrate that material cause and effect does not apply universally, and therefore that it is possible that not everything is subject to causation.

as humans not trapped in a chain of course and effect

Libertarianism

-A philosophy doesn’t require a divine being (religious views must reconcile free will with omnipotence)

gives ways in which humans are free and can perform action without external causes

-Incompatabailist- free will and any determinism dont fit

Existentialism

philosophical idea that human existence is without a set purpose in an uncaring universe; emphasis on human responsibility for actions

Sartre 2 types of being

There are two types of beings:

1. Être-en-soi – being in itself – inanimate objects that lack consciousness. To exist ‘en soi’ is to be a fact, like the paper knife. It is subject to cause and effect. This is how determinists treat human beings which implies that we are fixed.

2. Être-pour-soi – being for itself – beings conscious of their own consciousness, constantly under construction, forced to create themselves from nothing. Human beings are ‘pour-soi’- a person rather than a thing. The identity is not bound in a fixed label.

Philosophical libertarianism

-Many philosophers argue to be moral responsible; one must have moral autonomy.

> liberty of spontaneity suggested by Soft Determinism is not enough

>Compatibilism still means some elements of our actions are caused and determined by something else.

-SARTRE

>atheist, existentialist scholar.

-Humans are free to make their own choices.

>Free choice is about deciding how to act. We cannot suddenly choose to fly!

-disagreed with traditional religious ideas that a divine being created humans with a specific purpose.

>We are free because we were not created by a higher power.

Eg a paper knife is created with the purpose of opening letters or separating stuck together pages of a book. This is because it is created and designed by a being with a purpose in mind. It had an ‘essence’ before it was created.

>, existence precedes essence.

“he materialises in the world, encounters himself, and only afterward defines himself”- Sartre.

»Our essence is created as one makes free decisions.

-He acknowledges that are parts of our lives that we do not choose >some things are determined because we live in a certain period of time and in a part of the world.

BUT determinism is wrong to assume that this is all the information known about a person and results in their objectification.

Eg Sartre’s play ‘No Exit’: 3 are locked in a room for eternity and torment each other as they cannot take responsibility for their past actions (we must accept that we are condemned to freedom and that we are more than how we are perceived as our essence isn’t fixed)

-There are two types of beings:

1. Être-en-soi – being in itself – inanimate objects that lack consciousness.

   > It is subject to cause and effect.

   >This is how determinists treat human beings which implies that we are fixed.

2. Être-pour-soi – being for itself – beings conscious of their own consciousness, constantly under construction, forced to create themselves from nothing.

   >Human beings are ‘pour-soi’- a person rather than a thing. The identity is not bound in a fixed label.

>An action shows a person’s essence.

-‘Bad faith’: a self-deception,when one does not accept there is freedom. One has decided that they are determined.

Eg a waiter acts in a specific way as if his job as a waiter is his essence- all that he is. He acts as though he has no choice but to play his part and becomes a ‘waiter-thing’. The waiter in truth can be whatever he wants to be. He can leave the café.

>Acting in bad faith is tempting as it is easier to live in ignorance, but this is a dishonest way to live.

>Ethical decisions in abandonment: We have a huge responsibility as we are on our own- there is no God.

Eg Sartre likens the responsibility we bear to the feeling of vertigo: when climbing on a narrow cliff you have the knowledge that there is danger but there is fear because you know if you choose ‘negative conduct’ (do not take care) or ‘opposite conduct’ (throw yourself off), you are the one responsible.

-Realising we are radically free and having a sense of responsibility makes us truly human. 

>We are determined to make free decision.

Scientific libertarianism:

·      When looking at scientific libertarianism, we must look at the empirical/observable world. This involves the human brain as a physical object.

·      Cognitive neuroscience: scientific study of the biological processes and neural connections in the brain. How does the brain communicate messages from one area to another to create decisions for an action?

·      Yes, there is good evidence that there is cause and effect in the world BUT it is not universal! Scientific determinism is mistaken in thinking this is the case.

·     

Scientific libertarianism places an emphasis on scientific reasoning, empirical evidence, and rational dialogue.

·     

Libet’s experiment: this research influenced Sirigu and her team. Libet sat subjects in front of a large clock and asked them to flex their wrist at a time of their choosing. He was measuring the impulses travelling through the brain and reporting on these impulses over time. He found that brain activity happened consistently before their awareness of making the decision. This is called ‘Readiness Potential’: regarded as the process in the brain prepping to take an action.

·      2009: Dr Angela Sirigu and Dr Michel Desmurget- published a paper saying that when one electrically stimulates that posterior parietal cortex (one of the four major lobes of the cerebral cortex in the brain) it was possible to produce intentions to act. Subjects reported a ‘desire’ for movement, but no subjects actually carried said movement out.

·      Sirigu's research often focuses on how the brain initiates actions based on intentions. This can support the idea that individuals consciously control their actions, suggesting a form of free will. Her work on the mechanisms in the brain that are involved in planning and executing voluntary movements can be interpreted as evidence that conscious thought plays a role in our decisions, rather than everything being predetermined by neurobiological processes.

·      The research shows that the experience of decision making is a real brain event- it is not an illusion! This can imply an individual can be held morally responsible for their actions if both parietal and premotor cortexes are functioning.

·      This research was commented on by another person to argue that we have free will! This research can be interpreted differently (a good criticism)

·      The research shows that there is a decision-making part of the brain. This arguably shows that we have free will. The research all showed that the parietal cortex appears to be where decisions are initiated.

·      Ed Yong: science writer: “they show that our feelings of free will originate (at least partially) in the parietal cortex. It’s the activity of these neurons that creates a sense that we initiate actions of our own accord”.

·      Quantum mechanics: quantum mechanics reshapes our understanding of cause and effect, revealing that the interactions at the quantum level do not always conform to classical deterministic principles, leading to a more nuanced view of causality in the universe- there may not be absolute cause and effect. Quantum mechanics is inherently probabilistic. Particles do not have definite states until they are measured, which introduces an element of randomness at a fundamental level. Some argue that this indeterminism could allow for free will by suggesting that not all events are predetermined.

·      Criticisms:

o   Prof Patrick Haggard: arguably it is paradoxical. It is the same as saying to someone to ‘have free will now!’

o   The fact that one’s decisions are processes that begin before conscious awareness seems to lend more weight to the determinism side of the debate.

o   Free will is threatened by the experiments: our decisions are the result of causes over which we do not have control. Libet’s work suggests no brain dualism (our minds are distinct from our brain), our consciousness is not a separate thing but a quality that arises as part of the decision-making process. If you argue that, without mind-brain dualism, we make decisions before our consciousness of these decisions and therefore one supports the deterministic view that our decisions are a result of causes which we have no control, this is called epiphenomenalism. This means mental events are caused by physical events, not vice versa. Huxley: compared consciousness to the whistle on a train: the whistle is powered by the steam engine but can’t influence the movement of the train- this is like how the conscious mind is a by-product of the brain.

·      Strengths:

o   Free will is not threatened by these experiments: Libet’s ‘Readiness Potential is open to interpretations. It can be seen as ‘warming up’ to a decision. Decision-making can have conscious and unconscious elements e.g. a pianist makes lots of decisions to press keys when playing which are not fully conscious- this is the result of prior conditioning through practice- the pianist desires an automatic aspect of the performance but can add flourishes.

 

 

How much does an individual have free choice? How to use Sartre? AO2

-There is no God This absence of divine being means that there is not key essence/nature that we are created with.

>there is no predetermined function we have been created with. We can each create our own path.

-Determinism is a psychological evasion of the truth of freedom: we are ‘condemned to be free’.

BUT Sartre is that he has turned determinism- a scientific theory of causation- into a psychological excuse.

>Determinism is based on evidence of cause and effect in the world.

>There is evidence to show that our situation we are in is truly ultimate, we may not be able to freely transcend it. Our physical factors have an impact.

-Social roles: cannot define us (Sartre’s use of the waiter).

>One is free to stop acting whenever they want. We can transcend our roles.

BUT our social roles define and shape us (links to psychological determinism).

>F H Bradley: morality is founded by understanding the social nature of our lives and attending to the duties that accompany it.

>We discover our morality as part of a community- not by ourselves.

BUT Bertrand Russell would likely argue that morality should be rooted in individual experiences and rational thought rather than just community norms.

>He believed people should think critically about moral issues, rather than simply following societal expectations. Communities can hold outdated or harmful values.

>He would argue that moral progress often comes from questioning and challenging community beliefs, rather than accepting them uncritically.

 

Cognitive neuroscience

-Cognitive neuroscience: scientific study of the biological processes and neural connections in the brain. How does the brain communicate messages from one area to another to create decisions for an action?

Scientific libertarianism

- When looking at scientific libertarianism, we must look at the empirical/observable world. This involves the human brain as a physical object.

> eg Cognitive neuroscience: scientific study of the biological processes and neural connections in the brain. How does the brain communicate messages from one area to another to create decisions for an action?

-Yes, there is good evidence that there is cause and effect in the world BUT it is not universal! Scientific determinism is mistaken in thinking this is the case.

-Libet’s experiment: this research influenced Sirigu and her team- sat subjects in front of a large clock and asked them to flex their wrist at a time of their choosing.

>He was measuring the impulses travelling through the brain and reporting on these impulses over time.

>He found that brain activity happened consistently before their awareness of making the decision.

>This is called ‘Readiness Potential’: regarded as the process in the brain prepping to take an action.

-2009: Dr Angela Sirigui and Dr Michel Desmurget- published a paper saying that when one electrically stimulates that posterior parietal cortex it was possible to produce intentions to act. Subjects reported a ‘desire’ for movement, but no subjects actually carried said movement out.

>This can support the idea that individuals consciously control their actions, suggesting a form of free will.

> can be interpreted as evidence that conscious thought plays a role in our decisions, rather than everything being predetermined by neurobiological processes.

>The research all showed that the parietal cortex appears to be where decisions are initiated.

>it is not an illusion! This can imply an individual can be held morally responsible for their actions if both parietal and premotor cortexes are functioning.

BUT research can be interpreted differently

·      The research shows that there is a decision-making part of the brain. This arguably shows that we have free will.

-Quantum mechanics reshapes our understanding of cause and effect (may not be absolute)

>Particles do not have definite states until they are measured, which introduces an element of randomness at a fundamental level.

BUT:

-Prof Patrick Haggard: arguably it is paradoxical. It is the same as saying to someone to ‘have free will now!’

-The fact that one’s decisions are processes that begin before conscious awareness seems to lend more weight to the determinism side of the debate.

>our decisions are the result of causes over which we do not have control.

Libet’s work suggests no brain dualism (our minds are distinct from our brain), our consciousness is not a separate thing but a quality that arises as part of the decision-making process. If you argue that, without mind-brain dualism, we make decisions before our consciousness of these decisions and therefore one supports the deterministic view that our decisions are a result of causes which we have no control, this is called epiphenomenalism. This means mental events are caused by physical events, not vice versa. Huxley: compared consciousness to the whistle on a train: the whistle is powered by the steam engine but can’t influence the movement of the train- this is like how the conscious mind is a by-product of the brain.

Strengths

-Free will is not threatened by these experiments: Libet’s ‘Readiness Potential is open to interpretations. It can be seen as ‘warming up’ to a decision. Decision-making can have conscious and unconscious elements e.g. a pianist makes lots of decisions to press keys when playing which are not fully conscious- this is the result of prior conditioning through practice- the pianist desires an automatic aspect of the performance but can add flourishes.

 

 

Humanism

A psychological movement focusing on the individual and their potential for personal growth.

Psychological libertarianism

-Psychological determinism: links with behaviourism, there are observable behaviours which we can explain through external factors because we can be conditioned.

>This is one of the approaches to psychotherapy- conditioning the patient. 

-Everyone is free to become a fully functioning people (are open to growth and change, are adaptable, trust themselves (self-confident), are creative and have a fuller experience of life.)

> Contrasting with Freud.

CARL ROGERS

-Carl Rogers: key psychologist for psychological libertarianism.

>had a huge influence on counselling and psychotherapy in the 20th century. Due to his work, therapy called the ‘client-centred’/’person-centred’ approach was created.

-was influenced by Otto Rank (emphasised the importance of the self and personal experience- Rogers was encouraged to look at individual’s subjective experience.)

-Rogers was aware that every encounter between a therapist and patient was highly unique. He valued this individuality.

>wanted to establish the optimum conditions for personal growth.

-when taking an approach of the expert diagnosing the patient with insights from psychotherapeutic theory, the patients often failed to change. When he listened to them, he found that, through showing compassion, the patient could work out their own sources of pain and where they needed to go.

>He emphasised the individuals’ ability to shape their own life.

-Rogers is an advocate of humanistic psychology (focus on individuals)

-External factors can determine us, but these factors are not permanent. We can be conditioned but we can change this.

>rejected the permanent deterministic nature of Behaviourism- humans can achieve free will through the process that he termed “self-actualisation”.

>He discovered that his approach was able to allow humans to make free, unpredictable decisions.

-Self-actualisation: the making real of one’s potential, acting on your true feelings, the drive behind human life that everyone has.

>It is a term used about the individual person’s journey towards psychic health.

>It is to do with personal grown or becoming a person.

> Everyone wants to achieve this, and the person just needs the right conditions so it can be released/expressed but all situations are different

>Each person has an ideal self (where they wish they were) and an actual self (what they see in themselves as reality based on prior experience)

>When the two coincide, it is a state of congruence (similarity), but this is difficult to achieve- easier to achieve congruence if a person receives unconditional positive regard. These people then feel free to make their own choices because they are not worried someone will stop loving them because they might make a mistake.

>When in a state of congruence, you are capable of self-actualisation.

Conditions of the therapist to help a client self-actualise.

• Congruence of the therapist: no emotional distance, therapist cannot hide.

• Acceptance of the client: unconditional positive regard for their own uniqueness- they have their own value.

• Empathy for the client’s journey: therapist should try to see the world through their eyes.

·      How do we have free will and how are we not determined:

-Rogers argued that free will is about having the ability to choose and take responsibility for those choices, driven by our desire to grow and be authentic. We have free will because:

• We have a drive towards self-actualisation: we can make a choice that aligns with our true self.

• We have responsibility: if recognised one free will can be used to shape our lives.

• Subjective experience: we see and respond to the world differently.

o   When congruent, we are able to make effective choices.

 

 

Behaviourism

-psychological approach that looks at observable behaviours

BF Skinner

-it explains all human behaviour through external forces

Carl Rogers

-he didn’t treat symptoms but saw each patient as an individual

his writing is mainly on effective treatment not free will but he emphasises the individuals ability to shape their own life

Humanistic psychology

-A persons life cannot be determined by external conditioning (behaviourist Pavolv)

conditioning can occur due to parental or social pressure eg to conform to societies norms

BUT these are deterministic not permenant

‘I would remark that colossal rigidity, whether in dinosaurs or dictatorships, has a very poor record of evolutionary survival” (though behavioural conditioning can create an ordered society it also prevents free will, totalitarianism has been demonstrated to play out poorly eg 1984 no autonomy or moral responsibility )

-Rogers argued that this level of conditioning is not desirable and can lead to hugely negative outcomes.

People are turned in to robots, there is no individuality. It also removes free will and thus moral responsibility!

We can control people, this is a subjective preference, it does not mean we should.

-He disagrees with operant conditioning because we cannot objectively prove moral facts- not scientifically measurable

-Values the individual and believes that the individual is unique and free- everyone is inherently good

-wants his clients to live as full functioning people

a person with a healthy personality can live a good life

-discovered that his approach was able to allow humans to make free, unpredictable decisions

-each person has an ideal self (wish they were) with an actual self (see in themselves as reality based on prior experience)

-easier to achieve congruence if a person receives unconditional positionne refard

Rogers argued that free will is about having the ability to choose and take responsibility for those choices, driven by our desire to grow and be authentic. We have free will because:

1. We have a drive towards self-actualisation: we can make a choice that aligns with our true self.

2. We have responsibility: if recognised one free will can be used to shape our lives.
   Subjective experience: we see and respond to the world differently.

4. When congruent, we are able to make effective choices.

Οtto Rank

-emphasised the importance of the self and personal experience

influenced Rogers

Wished to depart from Freud (diagnosed a problem and applied a fixed methodology, patient is directed towards goals like an object)

Encouraged looking at individual’s subjective experience (encouraged treating them as an individual, setting their own goals, with less control)

Humanism

A psychological movement focusing on the individual and their pot for personal growth

Self actualisation

-Realisation of ones potential

>how one can achieve free will

>state of congruence, you are capable of self-actualisation

Because you are not worried about the reaction of others when occupying this realm

>people who self actualise are open to new experiences, trust their own abilities and dont fit just with the code of conduct given

Conditions of the therapist to help a client self-actualise

1. Congruence of the therapist: no emotional distance, therapist cannot hide

2. Acceptance of the client: unconditional positive regard for their own uniqueness- they have their own value.

3. Empathy for the client's journey: therapist should try to see the world through their eyes.