Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary
From: dgary@ecsvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Free Will. Free Lunch. Free Software.
Message-ID: <2952@ecsvax.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 17-Jul-84 12:04:51 EDT
Article-I.D.: ecsvax.2952
Posted: Tue Jul 17 12:04:51 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 18-Jul-84 06:44:04 EDT
References: houca.443 dartvax.2140 pyuxn.843
Lines: 65

<>
>From: victorf@houca.UUCP Thu Jul 12 10:25:35 1984
>According to Maxwell ( I think), if you know the location and motion of
>every particle in a system at one moment then you know the entire history
>and future of that system, if you're sophisticated enough.

This is the view of strict determinism as embraced by 19th century physics.
If it is true, then there obviously can be no free will.  However...

Modern physics embodies quantum mechanics, and quantum mechanics is
rooted not in strict causality but in probabilities.  Events on the
"quantum level" (that determined by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle)
are not deterministic.  Events on a grosser level, e.g. the motions of the
planets, are essentially deterministic, of course, because one probable
motion so overwhelms in likelihood any other.

In fairness I should note that some physicists have held that
quantum mechanics is only seemingly nondeterministic, that there are
"hidden variables" that would determine the outcome of events if we
could perceive them.  Einstein was the most famous exponent of this school.
Unfortunately, experimental evidence seems to have virtually ruled out
the "hidden variable" theory.

You may have heard of the thought experiment about "Schroedinger's Cat"
in which kitty is placed in a box with a radioisotope, a detector,
and a poison gas vial.  If a decay occurs (a truly random event) in a
given time, the gas is released and the cat perishes (a cruel experiment,
even as a gendankendingus).  This illustrates how noncausal
events on the quantum level can be leveraged up to the normally
"deterministic" world.  Another example would be the occurence of
"soft" computer errors due to radioactive decay and cosmic rays (a problem
for Shuttle flights - see Science, 13 July 1984).  Yet another example
(possibly) is the human brain.

This does not "prove" the existence of free will, of course.  Indeed, I
have no idea how I might prove it.  But it does suggest that in the
long run there is more randomness than determinism in the cosmos.  At
least there is SOME randomness.

If we have free will, it is conceivable that it operates by selecting
among the various probabilities with which we are presented.  One
mechanism for that might be provided by the "many worlds" interpretation
of quantum mechanics, which has world lines branching off to all the
possibilities at any moment.  Maybe our "minds" or "souls" if they
exist select a path to travel on.  This "Gradian Dualism" (he said with
not a trace of modesty or even common sense) has as an unpleasant
consequence that we are each alone in our own cosmos, surrounded by
automata.  This solipsism is a prospect that would appeal to few of us, except
perhaps some Libertarians... :-)

I don't think that "many worlds" view is too likely; I'm just pointing it
out.

I repeat that this is no disproof of epiphenomenalism, simply a
suggestion that things aren't as cut and dried as has been suggested.
And I still hold by my principle that whether or not free will truly
exists, it makes sense to pretend that it does.  If it does not exist,
we've lost nothing by our (evidently predetermined) assumption.
If it does exist, if we have REAL choice, then we have chosen to
believe in the truth.  Ya can't lose!

D Gary Grady
Duke University Computation Center, Durham, NC  27706
(919) 684-4146
USENET:  {decvax,ihnp4,akgua,etc.}!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary