On Free Will...

Free Will. What is it? It's a romantic concept that we are, in fact, in complete control of every decision we make. That if I told to move your finger at a random time that you would have complete control over when this happens and there is some higher form of consciousness that is in control of the propagation of nerve impulses that tell our finger to move. That our choice of music, taste or sexuality is purely a product of our free will. The oxford dictionary defines free will as "the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one’s own discretion." . This definition is an interesting one. Without the constraint of necessity or fate. Keep that in mind.

I'd like to perform a small experiment. At a random time within the next 30 seconds I would like you to extend you pointer finger. Go ...

Now, when you moved your finger, see if you can identify what made you move it at that time. What gave you the urge? Why didn't you move it 10 seconds earlier or later? What gave rise to the thought that said "I'm going to move it now"? Did your free will determine when exactly the neurotransmitters would release to even give rise to the thought "I am going to move my finger now"?

The release of the neurotransmitters from one neuron to another is required for thought propagation, yet we have no conscious control over it, or if we did, what gave rise to the command/thought to release the neurotransmitters? From here we are left with an infinite regress, a chicken and egg scenario. It is well accepted in the scientific literature that changes in the brain (that can be visualized with a brain scan) occur before an individual thought manifests to the point where, in the finger moving paradigm given above, the researchers were able to predict the finger movement before the subjects even were aware they were going to move. How is this free will? If your actions can be predicted before you are consciously aware of them. This is not acting without the constraint of necessity or fate.

Medical conditions that result in too much or too little of a neurotransmitter being released or produced can fundamentally change somebodies personality. Drugs that manipulate the levels of or imitate neurotransmitters can have similar effects. This demonstrates that our personality and thought processes are fundamentally dependent on the release and movement or chemicals in the brain.

Ultimately, our choices depend on a multitude of factors: surroundings, previous experience, and even diet. However, the concept of true free will fails when the neuroscience behind thought propagation is examined.

--

The religious use the concept of 'free will' ad nauseam to justify the condemnation of gay men and women. Yet, they also believe that their god is omniscient. What they don't realize is that these two concepts are mutually exclusive.

God knows your future (a requisite for omniscience). This means that there is only one path you can take in your life. God knows every single thought you will have for the rest of your life, meaning those are the only possible thoughts you are able to have. This fundamentally undermines the concept of freewill. If one is to have true free will then their actions should never be able to be predicted, to be able to act "without the constraint of necessity or fate". If god knows your future and has a plan for you, then you are bound by fate so by definition, a contradiction of free will.

Even in the supernatural realm the notion of free will collapses under its own definition.

While it is an attractive and reassuring concept that we are in complete control of the firings of our neurons, in reality it cannot be so. I'm aware this may not sit well with some people and the mind will initially reject this idea, but upon careful consideration it explains a lot of quirks of the human condition.

Free will fails both materialistically and supernaturally as a concept.

My atheism

Recently, someone I interact with on Twitter sent me a personal message asking me to justify my position on god. I wrote the poor guy a rather lengthy e-mail (be careful what you wish for eh haha). Given that I was thinking about what to make a first post on my blog I thought that would serve the purpose. So here it is ... This is why I am an atheist, and a vocal one supporting a humanist view.

"Finally got around to writing this, PhD is fairly intense at the moment.

So you asked why I believe god doesn't exist. First let me clarify, I think it is incredibly unlikely that a god exists and live my life as though none exist but I cannot say for sure. I am an agnostic atheist. So I'll say what has led to my current position.

I was raised secular (with the topic of god not even being broached) and was living a happy life. I was enrolled into a Catholic school (due to the quality of education the school was known for). This was my first real taste of organized religion and the concept of a god. We had prayer every day and a compulsory a religious class every day. I already had a fascination with science so was fairly well versed in basic physics and chemistry and my religious teachings completely contradicted what science had shown us with empirical evidence (at that stage it was age of the earth and evolution, but I have since learnt is not limited to those facets). I left that school an atheist, after being told what god is and what he supposedly has done (created everything in the universe so he can have a personal relationship with humans, created a list of rules that if we disobey we will be burnt in eternity) and after knowing science had already shown that some of those claims were factually incorrect, I left with the strong inclination that there was no god but did not claim a gnostic position on it.

Since then, I have lived my life, studied a degree (double major in biochemistry and pharmacology) and a masters degree (biochemistry) and am now studying my doctorate in Neuroscience while all the while quietly observing the many facets of life that religion creeps in to. Over my life I have become more and more humanist. When you take a humanist point of view you see not only how vile organized religion is but also how redundant it is. Morals are intrinsic, no need to read an ancient book with barbaric acts in to it know what is right and wrong. Also, the bigotry, prejudice, and violence that is documented in the bible continues to rear its ugly head in modern society with many of the different denominations of religion all under the guise of serving their lord. The violence and tyranny undertaken in religions name combined with the redundance of religion has led to my anti-organized religion stance. Which is why I have become more vocal about atheism and have tried to support anyone who has questions about their faith and perhaps want to consider a secular life! I have always maintained the position that "A doctrine should only affect those within it" - Meaning laws, societal values, education etc should not bear weight to the religious agenda.

It's quite liberating being able to say that and no be limited by 140 characters!

Anyway, long story - short, the 'evidence' for god is the bible, which has been shown to be factually incorrect in many places, has been said to be allegoric in many places, which has been written by men who may have been trying to explain amazing things they saw but lacked the knowledge to explain them, in others fundamentally flawed as a factual text. There is no evidence for a god anywhere else, there is suffering, death, unanswered prayers, multiple religions, multiple gods and science is answering the questions that a god used to provide an explanation for. 

I firmly believe you can live a good, moral, humanist, enjoyable life as an atheist and that religion is superfluous in an era of progressive science."

Thanks for reading! And welcome to the first post of my blog.