Did you enter this article? It wasn't because of a conscious decision. Your life circumstances forced you to do so. At least that's what neurobiologist Robert Sapolsky of Stanford University argues. Since we have no choice in the matter, we asked ChatGPT to tell us about the veteran researcher's firm assertion.
In his new book, Determined: A Science of Life Without Free Will, he challenges the human belief rooted in free will, arguing that virtually all human behavior is beyond our conscious control, just like the involuntary seizures of an epileptic seizure.
Drawing on over 40 years of studying humans and primates, Sapolsky offers a provocative perspective that dives into the complexity of our decision-making processes. Building on his previous bestseller, Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst, the book delves deeper into the neurochemical effects that shape our actions.
Sapolsky's assertion that human beings do not have free will is unusual in both scientific and philosophical circles—and he acknowledges it, but argues that accepting the absence of free will is essential for fostering a more just society. He argues that the rewards and punishments imposed on the basis of presumed control over one's actions create an inherently unfair world.
The premise depends on the idea that countless factors, sometimes beyond our awareness, influence our choices. Sapolsky argues that even the simplest decisions, such as reaching for a pen, are predetermined by a network of competing impulses and external stimuli. He calls for discarding the belief in human responsibility for his actions, arguing that external influences shape our decisions in ways whose existence and power we rarely recognize.
Sapolsky's position was supported and skepticized alike. Some philosophers and neuroscientists have adopted his deterministic perspective, advocating a change in the way society views moral responsibility and criminal justice—even though it means ending the war on crime. However, dissenting voices warn of the potential psychological consequences of adopting such a worldview, citing studies that indicate a link between distrust of free will and increased aggression.
The neurobiologist's journey from an Orthodox Jewish home to a liberal atheist by definition played a role in shaping his perspective; Sapolsky's rejection of religion, and the embrace of determinism, were motivated by personal insight in his early teens, and sparked a lifetime of research into the intersection of biology and faith.
Although Sapolsky may not sweep the majority with his controversial claims, he hopes to cultivate increased compassion by illuminating the impact of trauma on the brain. By understanding the neurobiological underpinnings of human struggle, he envisions a more empathetic society that does not advocate punishment.
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us