The concept of "free will" is a problematic one. Foremost of many problems inherent in the ready acceptance of it are these two basic questions: 1. What is will? 2. How is it free?
I think what many people are saying when using the term is that human beings have to ability to make conscious choices. But even in this form, one wonders how often individuals take the time to consciously evaluate whether to "go right" or "go left" in the fork of the road facing them. We are largely creatures of habit. We are also creatures who frequently apply our conscious deliberation after-the-fact. More as rationalization than computation. Then there is this: How un-biased (thus free) can our thinking be? Even conscious thought relies upon a heap of mental processes sparking away beneath and before the bright lights of our awareness.
A recent science finding brought the topic to mind. The title and lead tell us:
Sexual orientation and 'gender conformity' in women are both genetic traits, according to new research from Queen Mary, University of London. [source]
Hmm. While only a half-educated dolt could continue to claim that sexual orientation is a "lifestyle choice," the above strikes me as over-stated. Looking at the research, it seems the word strongly or largely should have been inserted before "genetic."
Briefly, the researchers -
...followed a group of 4,000 British women who were one of a pair of twins. They were asked questions about their sexual attractions and behaviour, and a series of follow up questions about their gender nonconformity. In line with previous research, the team found modest genetic influences on sexual orientation (25 per cent) and childhood gender nonconformity (31 per cent).
"Modest." Evidence that may have better justified the research authors' failure to use a modifier before genetic includes this supplemental research:
Studies also show that children who become gay or lesbian adults differ in such traits from those who become heterosexual – so-called gender nonconformity. Research which follows these children to adulthood shows that between 50 to 80 per cent of gender nonconforming boys become gay, and about one third of such girls become lesbian.
While the 50 to 80 percent looks fairly robust, I have my reservations. It seems a co-author of the study, Dr. Qazi Rahman also did. He mentioned two important non-genetic factors: environmental (as "partially responsible") and hormone exposure in the womb.
Perhaps it is important to remind ourselves that these nature-nurture variables are impossible to distangle. Without nature, there would be no nurture to act upon. Etc.
Back to free will. Even for the question of sexual orientation in the form of public declaration of a specific sexual identity, can a person freely choose which way to go? Can they transcend genetic and environmental influences? Can they fully ignore social pressures and incentives?
And what about this often overlooked problem: What motive will allow a person to counter-act other forces? In what regard can a motive make a person more free? Aren't personal motives and pure freedom at odds?
Without motives, a person would be completely free to decide between one fork or the other. Yet without motives a person would have no reason to decide. A decision would be impossible.
Leave a Reply