Free Will is an Illusion
In the late 1980s, the Government of India established the Center for Development of Advanced Computing (C-DAC) to keep pace with rapid technological advancements. The center also introduced six-month bootcamp courses to develop the advanced skills and capacity needed for the much-anticipated Information Technology boom in the global market. This rigorous and battle-tested six-month program was designed to quickly cross-skill engineering graduates from various majors, equipping them for IT positions.
Fast forward to the mid-2000s, a pivotal moment in my professional career. After struggling to find the right job in my passionate field of Mechanical Engineering, I finally decided to leave my engineering job and reorient myself into the computer science field. While engineering was my passion, I could not find opportunities in research and development due to several interesting events. My job profile at the time was more focused on people leadership, ensuring that I ran the department according to schedule with the help of a team of 15–20 members. This did not provide enough mental stimulation for my appetite.
Thanks to the visionary leaders of the 80s and 90s, I had a great opportunity to reorient my career in the shortest possible time and with less risk. In the summer of 2006, I was admitted to one of C-DAC’s most popular courses. As part of this course, our batch of around 60 students studied together for 16 long hours a day, seven days a week, for the first five and a half months. Sundays were mostly reserved for special classes, including people skills and mental health programs such as yoga. One of the essential aspects of this class was to build soft skills and mental health alongside advanced computer science skills.
I vividly remember a classic (and one of my favorite) lecture by Ms. Deshpande, a professor from the MBA college, lecturing us on personality building and developing mental strength. These sessions were usually scheduled on Sunday afternoons, and many students attended them as mandated. I joined them as I was always excited to listen to guest lecturers, especially from reputed schools and professions.
The professor was convincing us of the power of will and hard work, focusing on greater things to change our lives for the better. I could see the dullness on many faces in the room. So, I thought to myself, “Let’s cheer up the class.” In my usual style, I raised my hand and requested permission to ask a question.
“Ma’am, do you believe life is predefined?”
“Yes! I believe life can be predetermined.”
“If it is predefined and can also be predetermined, then how can we change it?”
The class burst into laughter. The professor sensed that she had walked into a paradox. She smiled and loosely stated that it is our duty to attempt to change for the good.
I was confident that the professor would respond to my question assertively. It is due to our shared values and culture in the Indian subcontinent that we believe there is an external ‘divine’ force that guides us through life. We are merely puppets in a larger scheme of things. For that matter, the following picture depicts the duality philosophy from the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON).
In my earlier article, I mentioned that whenever I found myself in the company of self, I found myself at the intersection of spirituality, philosophy, and science. And, many times, I revisited the following question at this fascinating intersection: If life is predefined, do we really have free will?
Back in 2006, when I was chatting with a few friends about the same topic, I explained that even if things are predefined, we still have control over the outcome. When a friend asked how, I said it is like video games. The games are already pre-designed and burned onto CDs. Still, our experiences are determined by the inputs to the game. While we have all permutations and combinations programmed, the experience is unique in a sophisticated game. And that makes life interesting. The Indic philosophy may correlate that with the concept of Karma. There are several schools of thought from ancient Indian civilization. The most fascinating for me is Advaita Vedanta or “Non-Duality.” I find it more scientific and can be interpreted in many shades. Many theoretical physicists and scientists, in general, have been fascinated by these philosophies over the years, but the general population remains unaware of them. This itself is considered as complex as Calculus or Quantum Physics but is considered the direct path to the truth. Several Western non-dual teachers are sharing their understanding of these concepts with general audiences using easy-to-understand metaphors. I find Rupert Spira to be one such guide who eloquently explains these rather complex concepts. From this point of view, free will has a totally different perspective.
The belief in a separate self leads to the idea of choice and free will. The separate self feels it has the freedom to choose, but this belief is a concession to the separate self. — Rupert Spira, a non-duality teacher
On the grounds of philosophy and science, I see some mixed thoughts. However, due to my inclination toward physics, I feel glad that many years ago, I was thinking along the same lines as some of the noted theoretical physicists. While there is an abundance of material available in the public domain, this funny but resourceful debate from noted scientists gives a glimpse of why there is an inclination toward the idea that ‘free will is an illusion!’ In this fun-filled debate, Brian Greene, a noted theoretical physicist, argues for the topic, while Neil deGrasse Tyson, a celebrity astrophysicist, plays the devil’s advocate. Indeed, it also includes the point of view from neuroscience. In short, according to Newtonian physics, things change behavior only if acted upon. Prof. Greene also explains how this theory fits from the standpoint of Quantum Physics.
Quantum physics introduces a probabilistic description of reality, where certain outcomes have a range of probabilities. However, the current understanding of quantum physics does not provide a clear explanation for how consciousness influences the selection of one outcome from the probabilistic haze.
Sam Harris, a neuroscientist, philosopher, and atheist, provides an interesting point of view on the topic. He holds the view that our sense of self and free will are intimately intertwined, yet while the notion of self is not an illusion, the notion of free will is indeed illusory.
By paying closer attention to our thoughts and intentions, we realize that we don’t actually have control over them.
A simple litmus test to gauge one’s ability to experience the free will is to attempt to concentrate on a single thought for five minutes. Invariably, we find that certain forces disrupt our thought patterns, preventing us from sustaining that singular focus. External stimuli and internal mental chatter conspire to divert our attention, making it challenging to maintain an unbroken stream of consciousness on the chosen subject.
So…
Why does it matter?
The acknowledgment of external factors influencing one’s actions can foster greater self-compassion and compassion towards others. When we truly understand that an individual’s behavior is not solely a product of their own volition but is shaped by circumstances and forces beyond their control, it becomes easier to approach situations with empathy and a deeper understanding of the self.
By applying this theory (again, as Prof. Greene says, it is determined at the big bang), I experience a sense of contentment and balance in my thoughts and opinions about others in both my personal and professional life, even when some acquaintances do not exhibit desirable opinions or behavioral patterns in their day-to-day interactions. The empathetic approach certainly helps me maintain compassion towards individuals and mitigate the urge to react impulsively.
Some may argue that if free will is an illusion, it could lead to a reluctance to act or a tendency to use it as an excuse for inaction. While this concern is valid, it is important to recognize that the absence of free will does not negate our ability to make choices. Whether we decide to act or remain idle, the most significant aspect of this theory is the recognition that the future is inherently uncertain. Consequently, the presence or absence of free will becomes less relevant when taking action. Instead, what matters is the courage and compassion that this understanding instills, particularly when faced with unfavorable outcomes. By acknowledging that our actions are influenced by external forces, we can approach mistakes with greater understanding and self-forgiveness.
Responding to life’s challenges with equanimity and humor can help us navigate the absence of free will. Accepting our lack of control over events allows us to find peace in the face of adversity.
In the current state of affairs, where we witness a polarization and amplification of political, religious, or cultural viewpoints dividing societies, it becomes increasingly crucial to cultivate empathy and understanding. As Professor Greene humorously suggested in the video, even seemingly minor actions, such as Dr. Tyson’s choice of a cheeseburger, were determined at the time of the Big Bang. This perspective makes it easier to empathize with friends or acquaintances who hold contrasting viewpoints on any given topic. By recognizing that our beliefs and actions are shaped by a complex interplay of factors beyond our control, we can approach differing perspectives with an open mind and a willingness to understand rather than judge.
This is indeed an intriguing topic. I’m confident that you may have valuable insights to share (perhaps programmed since the Big Bang?) that we would appreciate learning. Please feel free to express your perspectives.
