Nov 02, 2020 07:00:00

Why do scientists claim that 'there is no free will'?

The existence of '

free will ' that humans can control their own judgment is an area that has not yet been scientifically proven and is still controversial. People must continue to make decisions in their lives, but why there is a claim that 'free will does not exist' is explained by Associate Professor Stephen Bodie, the representative of the Institute of Decision-Making Neuroscience at the University of Melbourne. I am explaining.

Will I or won't I? Scientists still haven't figured out free will, but they're having fun trying
https://theconversation.com/will-i-or-wont-i-scientists-still-havent-figured-out-free-will-but-theyre-having-fun-trying-132085

In 1983, American psychologist Benjamin Libet conducted an experiment on the existence of human 'free will.' In this experiment, subjects were connected to a machine that measures muscle and brain activity, and when they felt that they needed to bend their wrists, they acted accordingly. At this time, the moment when the subject felt that he needed to bend his wrist was also recorded.

When rivets compared 'muscle movement', 'brain activity', and 'subject recording time', first, 'brain activity' and 'subject recording time' occurred before 'muscle movement'. I found out that. Not surprising in itself, the focus of this study was that 'brain activity' was about 0.5 seconds faster than 'subject recording time.' This was interpreted as 'the brain has already decided what to do before one recognizes that it has decided at this moment,' leading to the claim that humans do not have free will.

Some modern scientists deny the idea that 'consciousness' or 'self' exists separately from the brain. However, considering that the brain gives instructions to the body, it is not unnatural to think that a person's 'intention' or 'recognition' is the result of the judgment of the brain. Bodie points out. Others question whether 'bending the wrist' really can be called a decision, and the accuracy of the time recorded as the moment of decision.

On the other hand, research results supporting the research of rivets have been published one after another. A study using fMRI, which was not available at the time, found that the decision to choose one of two options could be read by a brain scan before it was recognized by the individual.

This issue involves the debate 'what is free will?' In the first place. Theoretically, in the presence of free will, one would make the same decision when time rewinds to the moment of decision. This is because the decisions made by a person are not random and are not influenced by external factors, but are made by the 'intention of the person'. However, people are not influenced by external factors, but by 'internal factors' such as memories, desires, wishes, and desires. When a person's decisions are influenced by the random activity of neurons that are active during decision making, the person's 'decision' is certainly not free and is the result of brain activity.

On the other hand, it is also important whether what is called a 'decision' is the moment when the result is reached, or the entire process to achieve it. The findings of rivets are taken for granted if the process itself is included in the 'decision' as well as the moment the conclusion is reached.

The results of Rivet's research did not solve the problem of free will, but the results of this research have led many to think about 'what is free will.' Although no conclusions have been reached yet, Mr. Beauty said that the publication of the findings by Rivet has greatly advanced the fields of cognitive neuroscience and voluntary decision-making.