"Forget it, Stosh. It's Intellectual Babbling."
If you say that again within earshot of this author and his acolytes, you might get this response:
Me? I'll just pop this in the DVD player:
Posted on 10/21/2023 8:22:02 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
After more than 40 years of studying humans and other primates, Stanford neurobiologist Robert Sapolsky has reached the conclusion that virtually all human behavior is as far beyond our conscious control as the division of cells or the beating of our hearts. (Of course, he had to.)
Therefore, we mustn’t harshly judge such heretofore disdained folks as drunk drivers, serial criminals, Hamas terrorists, and those who bring 29 items to the “8 items or less” checkout lane.
Sapolsky said:
“The world is really screwed up and made much, much more unfair by the fact that we reward people and punish people for things they have no control over. We’ve got no free will. Stop attributing stuff to us that isn’t there.”
Yes, this screwed up world would be a much, much better place if we stopped rewarding and punishing people based on their behavior. Incredibly, Sapolsky is a MacArthur “genius” grant winner, proving that the people who bestow that award are utterly clueless. (Through no fault of their own, of course!) if (publir_show_ads) { document.write("" + ""); }
Indeed, the vast majority of neuroscientists and philosophers believe humans have at least some degree of free will. As do most of the rest of us. But perhaps we have no choice in the matter.
Sapolsky has a new book out, titled, Determined: A Science of Life Without Free Will. (I bet he just had to write it!) Doesn’t sound much like “science” to me. But maybe we should ask Dr. Fauci.
The book chronicles neurochemical influences that contribute to human behaviors, and analyzes time, short or long, before we do what we do. Sapolsky had previously written a bestseller called, “Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst,” which won the Los Angeles Times Book Prize and received other accolades.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
"Forget it, Stosh. It's Intellectual Babbling."
If you say that again within earshot of this author and his acolytes, you might get this response:
Me? I'll just pop this in the DVD player:
Yep.
And that's the problem. We have a large class in our society that claims it's not about fault, punishment or responsibility because the government can fix it.
Then he doesn’t have one either and he is just an automaton.
One could wax totally Calvinist right now if one were so inclined.
“And that’s the problem. We have a large class in our society that claims it’s not about fault, punishment or responsibility”
No. The problem is we have a large portion of the population that is exempt from suffering the consequences of their choices.
And yes that’s mainly the fault of government, ie, politicians, or more precisely the people who collectively elect them - us.
And so we, collectively, are suffering the consequences of OUR bad choices.
free will is the choice to focus or not and the choice to think or not
I research and study consciousness from a neuroscience, psychiatric and spiritual perspective.
Often negative results are a function of free will.
Free will is a function of consciousness development.
OK, so it IS about fault, punishment and responsibility. You’ve got me spinning like a faulty watch.
So, if I punch his lights out, it ain’t my fault. I had no choice.
So, Pavlov's dogs don't really salivate at the sound of a bell because behavior can't be manipulated? And the broken window theory of crime control doesn't work?
Maybe at some 'micro level' this guy's on to something - but at the real world level where we live? Nope, he's another liberal/progressives nutcase making excuses for psychopaths.
I tend to agree, or at least think it's a far narrower stream to access than most people think.
But if that is so, then why do we feel we can hold people “responsible” for their choices and actions, if they had no control over their choices. And how do we then justify “punishing” someone for a “crime”?
Because even the pre-determinist believes that a person's behavior is a combination of nature and nurture, and punishment becomes part of the nurture. So even if someone is pre-determined to a certain behavior, learning that it will result in misery will become part of the data that guides their little internal flow chart. Also, we still must protect society from certain dangers, and that includes people or actions with a proven track record of destruction.
No, that doesn't seem to be his stance. I'm listening to one of his interviews now and I don't think that's where he's going. He probably leans more toward the preventative mindset.
There is always a cause—or more correctly, causes. It’s just that we are now too complex to understand ourselves.
That was the first song that came to mind. The second song that came to mind was one that RUSH did much later, with more life experiences behind them:
“The Way the Wind Blows”
We can only grow the way the wind blows
On a bare and weathered shore
We can only bow to the here and now
In our elemental war...
Like a solitary pine
On a bare, wind blasted shore
We can only grow the way the wind blows
In our elemental war...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hY4jnK_IoRg
********************************
When I first heard the later song I was really disappointed in the lyrics - it was so different than the early RUSH stuff of independence, free will, etc.
There is truth in both Freewill and that the environment around us (and within us) dictates what will be. The nurture and nature we receive is really just a roll of the bones.
And to consider, our kind is made in the image of God.
Don’t blame him: he didn’t have a choice in saying that.
That’s odd. I made the conscious decision to quit cigarettes and alcohol. Was that not an act of free will? The nicotine addiction did not evince a strong example of free will.
Some say it’s really because the government raised the tax on cigarette consumption.
“OK, so it IS about fault, punishment and responsibility. “
No it’s about controlling behavior via consequences and/or rewards... or THREATS of consequences and PROMISES of rewards.
It’s like training your dog or your kids to do the “right thing”. You dish out bad consequences for bad behavior, and rewards for good behavior. Most will learn and remember those “lessons” and act accordingly. A few may require multiple “lessons” and a very very few never “learn”.
The “pursuit of happiness” is the ultimate driver of human behavior (animals too, for that matter). Good or bad consequences that result from some behavior determine whether he’s going to be happy or not. His INNATE ability to learn and remember those experiences allow him to “predict” which behavior will cause him increased happiness or pain. And those “cause and effect” lessons allow him to make better future choices of behavior in his pursuit of happiness.
The concepts of “fault”, “responsibility” and “punishment” only arise in the context of “free will”, which in my view is an illusion. We have “will” but it is not “free” of the “hardware” we were born with and the vagaries of the environment that surrounds us.
If there is free will then those concepts are valid, if not then they don’t make sense.
It’s really that simple. I don’t understand why it’s so hard to grasp.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.