Freedom, n. Exemption from the stress of authority in a beggarly half dozen of restraint’s infinite multitude of methods. A political condition that every nation supposes itself to enjoy in virtual monopoly.
Ambrose Bierce - The Devil’s Dictionary
This is our final post in the Free Will series, and there are many points we’d like to clarify. (We’d like to note that this post is not an apology but a final nail to hammer our points home.)
First, believing in Free Will does not mean you are a better or worse person than those that do not believe in Free Will. Furthermore, it is not incompatible with religion. As we colloquially use the term, Free Will is the ability to choose one's own actions without restraint and to determine one's own outcomes (as best as you can). Those who believe in Free Will might see it as a general guide to personal behavior, free from internal and external constraints across situations for both self and others. What we have argued is that you are not free from the consequences of your choices, which guide your behavior. As our friend, Carl Binder, eloquently told us, Free Will is the experience of choosing between positive reinforcers without any coercive consequences. Free is a word that needs to be interpreted. We feel free when we choose between positive consequences. We do not when aversive control is involved. The argument about whether or not we have Free Will is entirely contextual.
While belief or lack of belief in free will does not impact a person’s ethics, it can influence how they view the causes of behavior. Those who believe in Free Will may be more likely to attribute behavior to internal or dispositional factors, while those who do not believe in Free Will may be more likely to consider the role of situational factors. (Notice the use of the word, may. We do not intend to speak for or about anyone.) This can be seen in the fundamental attribution error, where individuals tend to overlook contextual factors and instead attribute behavior to personality or character traits. Understanding how our beliefs about Free Will shape our attributions of behavior can help us appreciate the complexity of human decision-making and the role that both internal and external factors play in shaping our choices.
The fundamental attribution error is relevant because when we see someone else do something, we tend to attribute their behavior to things such as personality or character traits, rather than considering the role that environmental or situational factors might play. This bias can lead us to make inaccurate judgments and overlook important contextual factors that may be influencing the behavior in question. This opposes behaviorism's emphasis on the role of the environment in shaping behavior and the belief that behavior is ultimately determined by external factors beyond an individual's control. For example, if someone cuts us off in traffic, we might assume that they are a rude and aggressive person, rather than considering the possibility that they might be rushing to an emergency or might have made an honest mistake. (Think of Pat Friman’s baby in the backseat).
However, we need to reiterate that behaviorism’s incompatibility with Free Will does not mean we are not responsible for our behaviors. People often incorrectly assume that lacking Free Will means everything is determined and nothing you can do will change that. This is not true. We do make choices - behaviorism simply posits that our behavior is a cumulative effect of a very unique and individualized environment and our genetics. We’re not born morally bankrupt or heaven-sent angels who can do no wrong. Behaviorism also does not require you to abandon your religious beliefs. Many religious beliefs and doctrines include the concept of Free Will. For instance, Christianity teaches that God granted humans Free Will, and it is their responsibility to choose between good and evil. The Islamic faith also states that Allah created humans with Free Will and that it is their decision to use it properly. Similarly, Judaism posits that humans are created with Free Will, and it is their responsibility to make moral choices. These examples illustrate that Free Will and religion can coexist. And because we understand that we do make choices (but those choices are NOT free from consequences), there is no reason that you can not be a behaviorist who enjoys the community and culture provided by your choice of worship.
The Free Will series has explored various perspectives on the concept of Free Will, its relationship with determinism and behaviorism, and its compatibility with religious beliefs. Behaviorism suggests that our choices and actions are influenced by our environment and genetics, rather than being completely autonomous, which people typically assume lacking Free Will means. However, this does not absolve us of responsibility for our actions, and we must endure the consequences of our choices. It is important to note that belief in Free Will or lack thereof does not make someone a better or worse person, nor does it necessarily conflict with religious beliefs. Ultimately, our understanding of Free Will should prompt us to consider the various factors that shape human behavior and guide us to make responsible choices.
Looking forward to your feedback!