Category Archives: philosophy

I Should Like To Say Two Things

Standard
I Should Like To Say Two Things

I’m an admirer of the late Bertrand Russell — a philosopher, mathematician, and Nobel laureate in literature. This week, I came across an interview with the BBC where he was asked. “Suppose, Lord Russell, this film were to be looked at by our descendants like a Dead Sea scroll in a thousand years’ time. What would you think it’s worth telling that generation about the life you’ve lived and the lessons you’ve learned from it?”

I should like to say two things, one intellectual and one moral.

The intellectual thing I should want to say to them is this: When you are studying any matter or considering any philosophy, ask yourself only, “What are the facts, and what is the truth that the facts bear out?” Never let yourself be diverted, either by what you wish to believe, or by what you think would have beneficent social effects if it were believed. But look only and solely at what are the facts. That is the intellectual thing that I should wish to say.

The moral thing I should wish to say to them is very simple. I should say, “Love is wise; hatred is foolish.” In this world, which is getting more and more closely interconnected, we have to learn to tolerate each other. We have to learn to put up with the fact that some people say things that we don’t like. We can only live together in that way. And if we are to live together, and not die together, we must learn a kind of charity and a kind of tolerance, which is absolutely vital to the continuation of human life on this planet.

Here’s the full interview.

Parlour Trick of the Mind

Standard
Parlour Trick of the Mind

Think of two names.

Okay, now throw ’em away. Think of two more. Any two will do.

Got them? Good.

Now, choose one of them and think really hard about it.

I will now attempt to guess—

Just kidding. I have no idea what you’re thinking. It doesn’t matter. What I want to do is pick your brain.

How many names do you know in total? Hundreds? Thousands? Did you consider all of them to arrive at your final two? Obviously, you didn’t. Instead, a few names just popped into your mind. Why those names, do you think, and not others? The answer is complex, no doubt. The takeaway, however, is that you — your conscious self — do not have full control over the input that bubbles up from your subconscious.

But you did choose one name from two in the end. At least you had control over that, right? Well, maybe. Maybe not. By analysing brain function with fMRI, neuroscientists have demonstrated that they can accurately predict people’s decisions — say between pushing a ‘left’ or ‘right’ button — prior to the individuals’ actual awareness of having made the decision.

It may be that even our decisions are injected into our awareness, just like the rest of the subconsciously-generated input that escape our conscious control. If that’s true, free will is an illusion. And to make matters worse, we may very well live in a deterministic world where events are necessitated by antecedent events. That is to say, Laplace’s Demon — a creature who knows everything about the laws of nature and the current state of the universe, such as the precise location and momentum of every atom etc. — knows what you’re going to do next before you know it. And if you could reset, you could not but do the same as before. Everything is determined.

While there is argument to the contrary, the belief that free will is a necessary condition of moral responsibility is orthodoxy. There’s an incentive, therefore, to save free will. Enter compatibilism, the philosophical thesis that free will and determinism are compatible. Free will is not an illusion, they say. Free will is just not the free will you think you have.

But this was all a parlour trick. In the end, we are more than just our awareness; we are our bodies. Are we driving and in control of it? That depends. But we feel in control, and that proves useful. Maybe that’s all that’s important. The decisions that we make matter, very much — to us and to others. We don’t, after all, possess the knowledge of demons.