Following the train of thought from our previous meeting on religion, last Friday at the Science Café the topic for debate was determinism vs. free will. The person in charge of waking up our sleepy Friday afternoon brains was Mantas with an introduction to the main positions on this issue (hard and soft determinism, libertarianism, fatalism) and their implications for rationality and moral responsibility.
Debate emerged on two different levels: some preferred the debate on nature's laws as the cause of human action as opposed to 'predeterminism' or whether there is a written destiny; others addressed the relative importance of genetics and environment when explaining human behavior.
Also discussed was the relation between free will and consciousness; whether what we consciously choose is the result of free will and whether free will comes into play only in conscious choices or even unconscious reactions. As food for thought, experiments that use neuroimaging suggest that we choose first and are only aware of our choice afterwards.
As our down to earth examples, we shared thoughts on crime and its consequences (why speeding with your car if you know you could be fined? If the fines are lower will you go faster?), on sexual orientation (is it determined from birth?), on resilience or the capacity of some people to cope with stress and adversity better than others, and on the relation between feeling and thought (what comes first? Do we cry because we’re sad or are we sad because we cry?)...
As always, though there was a clear general inclination towards determinism, we left with more questions than answers...
Patricia Vale Vasconcelos,
DG EACAlso discussed was the relation between free will and consciousness; whether what we consciously choose is the result of free will and whether free will comes into play only in conscious choices or even unconscious reactions. As food for thought, experiments that use neuroimaging suggest that we choose first and are only aware of our choice afterwards.
As our down to earth examples, we shared thoughts on crime and its consequences (why speeding with your car if you know you could be fined? If the fines are lower will you go faster?), on sexual orientation (is it determined from birth?), on resilience or the capacity of some people to cope with stress and adversity better than others, and on the relation between feeling and thought (what comes first? Do we cry because we’re sad or are we sad because we cry?)...
As always, though there was a clear general inclination towards determinism, we left with more questions than answers...
Patricia Vale Vasconcelos,
Next, on Science Café… radioactivity! Are you determined to free willingly join the next scica? Friday May 27th, 6.30pm, Madou auditorium.
For more details please contact Eleftherios Mamais or Patricia Vale Vasconcelos on their Commission emails.
No comments:
Post a Comment