Buy new:
-19% $10.49$10.49
Delivery Tuesday, January 7
Ships from: Amazon.com Sold by: Amazon.com
Save with Used - Good
$9.42$9.42
Delivery Wednesday, January 8
Ships from: Amazon Sold by: Zoom Books Company
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Free Will [Deckle Edge] Paperback – March 6, 2012
Explore your book, then jump right back to where you left off with Page Flip.
View high quality images that let you zoom in to take a closer look.
Enjoy features only possible in digital – start reading right away, carry your library with you, adjust the font, create shareable notes and highlights, and more.
Discover additional details about the events, people, and places in your book, with Wikipedia integration.
Purchase options and add-ons
A belief in free will touches nearly everything that human beings value. It is difficult to think about law, politics, religion, public policy, intimate relationships, morality—as well as feelings of remorse or personal achievement—without first imagining that every person is the true source of his or her thoughts and actions. And yet the facts tell us that free will is an illusion.
In this enlightening book, Sam Harris argues that this truth about the human mind does not undermine morality or diminish the importance of social and political freedom, but it can and should change the way we think about some of the most important questions in life.
- Print length96 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- Publication dateMarch 6, 2012
- Dimensions0.43 x 5.63 x 7.99 inches
- ISBN-109781451683400
- ISBN-13978-1451683400
Frequently bought together
![Free Will [Deckle Edge]](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71kUwZxYQbL._AC_UL116_SR116,116_.jpg)
More items to explore
From the Publisher
Editorial Reviews
Review
—V. S. Ramachandran, Director of the Center for Brain and Cognition, UCSD, and author of The Tell-Tale Brain
"Brilliant and witty—and never less than incisive—Free Will shows that Sam Harris can say more in 13,000 words than most people do in 100,000."
—Oliver Sacks
"Free will is an illusion so convincing that people simply refuse to believe that we don’t have it. In Free Will, Sam Harris combines neuroscience and psychology to lay this illusion to rest at last. Like all of Harris’s books, this one will not only unsettle you but make you think deeply. Read it: you have no choice."—Jerry A. Coyne, Professor of Ecology and Evolution, University of Chicago, and author of Why Evolution Is True
"Many say that believing that there is no free will is impossible—or, if possible, will cause nihilism and despair. In this feisty and personal essay, Harris offers himself as an example of a heart made less self-absorbed, and more morally sensitive and creative, because this particular wicked witch is dead."
—Owen Flanagan, Professor of Philosophy, Duke University, and author of The Really Hard Problem
"If you believe in free will, or know someone who does, here is the perfect antidote. In this smart, engaging, and extremely readable little book, Sam Harris argues that free will doesn’t exist, that we’re better off knowing that it doesn’t exist, and that—once we think about it in the right way—we can appreciate from our own experience that it doesn’t exist. This is a delightful discussion by one of the sharpest scholars around.”
—Paul Bloom, Professor of Psychology, Yale University, and author of How Pleasure Works
About the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
The question of free will touches nearly everything we care about. Morality, law, politics, religion, public policy, intimate relationships, feelings of guilt and personal accomplishment—most of what is distinctly human about our lives seems to depend upon our viewing one another as autonomous persons, capable of free choice. If the scientific community were to declare free will an illusion, it would precipitate a culture war far more belligerent than the one that has been waged on the subject of evolution. Without free will, sinners and criminals would be nothing more than poorly calibrated clockwork, and any conception of justice that emphasized punishing them (rather than deterring, rehabilitating, or merely containing them) would appear utterly incongruous. And those of us who work hard and follow the rules would not “deserve” our success in any deep sense. It is not an accident that most people find these conclusions abhorrent. The stakes are high.
In the early morning of July 23, 2007, Steven Hayes and Joshua Komisarjevsky, two career criminals, arrived at the home of Dr. William and Jennifer Petit in Cheshire, a quiet town in central Connecticut. They found Dr. Petit asleep on a sofa in the sunroom. According to his taped confession, Komisarjevsky stood over the sleeping man for some minutes, hesitating, before striking him in the head with a baseball bat. He claimed that his victim’s screams then triggered something within him, and he bludgeoned Petit with all his strength until he fell silent.
The two then bound Petit’s hands and feet and went upstairs to search the rest of the house. They discovered Jennifer Petit and her daughters—Hayley, 17, and Michaela, 11—still asleep. They woke all three and immediately tied them to their beds.
At 7:00 a.m., Hayes went to a gas station and bought four gallons of gasoline. At 9:30, he drove Jennifer Petit to her bank to withdraw $15,000 in cash. The conversation between Jennifer and the bank teller suggests that she was unaware of her husband’s injuries and believed that her captors would release her family unharmed.
While Hayes and the girls’ mother were away, Komisarjevsky amused himself by taking naked photos of Michaela with his cell phone and masturbating on her. When Hayes returned with Jennifer, the two men divided up the money and briefly considered what they should do. They decided that Hayes should take Jennifer into the living room and rape her—which he did. He then strangled her, to the apparent surprise of his partner.
At this point, the two men noticed that William Petit had slipped his bonds and escaped. They began to panic. They quickly doused the house with gasoline and set it on fire. When asked by the police why he hadn’t untied the two girls from their beds before lighting the blaze, Komisarjevsky said, “It just didn’t cross my mind.” The girls died of smoke inhalation. William Petit was the only survivor of the attack.
Upon hearing about crimes of this kind, most of us naturally feel that men like Hayes and Komisarjevsky should be held morally responsible for their actions. Had we been close to the Petit family, many of us would feel entirely justified in killing these monsters with our own hands. Do we care that Hayes has since shown signs of remorse and has attempted suicide? Not really. What about the fact that Komisarjevsky was repeatedly raped as a child? According to his journals, for as long as he can remember, he has known that he was “different” from other people, psychologically damaged, and capable of great coldness. He also claims to have been stunned by his own behavior in the Petit home: He was a career burglar, not a murderer, and he had not consciously intended to kill anyone. Such details might begin to give us pause.
As we will see, whether criminals like Hayes and Komisarjevsky can be trusted to honestly report their feelings and intentions is not the point: Whatever their conscious motives, these men cannot know why they are as they are. Nor can we account for why we are not like them. As sickening as I find their behavior, I have to admit that if I were to trade places with one of these men, atom for atom, I would be him: There is no extra part of me that could decide to see the world differently or to resist the impulse to victimize other people. Even if you believe that every human being harbors an immortal soul, the problem of responsibility remains: I cannot take credit for the fact that I do not have the soul of a psychopath. If I had truly been in Komisarjevsky’s shoes on July 23, 2007—that is, if I had his genes and life experience and an identical brain (or soul) in an identical state—I would have acted exactly as he did. There is simply no intellectually respectable position from which to deny this. The role of luck, therefore, appears decisive.
Of course, if we learned that both these men had been suffering from brain tumors that explained their violent behavior, our moral intuitions would shift dramatically. But a neurological disorder appears to be just a special case of physical events giving rise to thoughts and actions. Understanding the neurophysiology of the brain, therefore, would seem to be as exculpatory as finding a tumor in it. How can we make sense of our lives, and hold people accountable for their choices, given the unconscious origins of our conscious minds?
Free will is an illusion. Our wills are simply not of our own making. Thoughts and intentions emerge from background causes of which we are unaware and over which we exert no conscious control. We do not have the freedom we think we have.
Free will is actually more than an illusion (or less), in that it cannot be made conceptually coherent. Either our wills are determined by prior causes and we are not responsible for them, or they are the product of chance and we are not responsible for them. If a man’s choice to shoot the president is determined by a certain pattern of neural activity, which is in turn the product of prior causes—perhaps an unfortunate coincidence of bad genes, an unhappy childhood, lost sleep, and cosmic-ray bombardment—what can it possibly mean to say that his will is “free”? No one has ever described a way in which mental and physical processes could arise that would attest to the existence of such freedom. Most illusions are made of sterner stuff than this.
The popular conception of free will seems to rest on two assumptions: (1) that each of us could have behaved differently than we did in the past, and (2) that we are the conscious source of most of our thoughts and actions in the present. As we are about to see, however, both of these assumptions are false.
But the deeper truth is that free will doesn’t even correspond to any subjective fact about us—and introspection soon proves as hostile to the idea as the laws of physics are. Seeming acts of volition merely arise spontaneously (whether caused, uncaused, or probabilistically inclined, it makes no difference) and cannot be traced to a point of origin in our conscious minds. A moment or two of serious self-scrutiny, and you might observe that you no more decide the next thought you think than the next thought I write.
Product details
- ASIN : 1451683405
- Publisher : Free Press; First Edition (March 6, 2012)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 96 pages
- ISBN-10 : 9781451683400
- ISBN-13 : 978-1451683400
- Item Weight : 4.5 ounces
- Dimensions : 0.43 x 5.63 x 7.99 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #40,371 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #15 in Sociology & Religion
- #19 in Free Will & Determinism Philosophy
- #104 in History & Philosophy of Science (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Sam Harris is the author of five New York Times best sellers. His books include The End of Faith, Letter to a Christian Nation, The Moral Landscape, Free Will, Lying, Waking Up, and Islam and the Future of Tolerance (with Maajid Nawaz), The Four Horseman (with Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens), and Making Sense. The End of Faith won the 2005 PEN Award for Nonfiction. His writing and public lectures cover a wide range of topics—neuroscience, moral philosophy, religion, meditation practice, human violence, rationality—but generally focus on how a growing understanding of ourselves and the world is changing our sense of how we should live.
Sam’s work has been published in more than 20 languages and has been discussed in The New York Times, Time, Scientific American, Nature, Rolling Stone, and many other publications. He has written for The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The Economist, The Times (London), The Boston Globe, The Atlantic, and The Annals of Neurology, among others. He also hosts the Making Sense Podcast, which was selected by Apple as one of the “iTunes Best” and has won a Webby Award for best podcast in the Science & Education category.
Sam received a degree in philosophy from Stanford University and a Ph.D. in neuroscience from UCLA. He has also practiced meditation for more than 30 years and has studied with many Tibetan, Indian, Burmese, and Western meditation teachers, both in the United States and abroad. Sam has created the Waking Up Course for anyone who wants to learn to meditate in a modern, scientific context.
Related products with free delivery on eligible orders
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonCustomers say
Customers find the book's interpretation and conclusions interesting. They find it a worthwhile read with clear language and concise writing. The book is described as engaging, entertaining, and worth the price. Readers appreciate the author's ability to say things simply and clearly.
AI-generated from the text of customer reviews
Customers find the book insightful and eloquently written. They say it provides fuel for smart debate and the development of mature opinions. The premise is interesting, but some readers did not find it convincing. The book provides a good theory and explanation that is useful in a social context. It has a provocative message about free will that is cogent and forceful.
"...of free will has only boosted his ethics and increased his feelings of compassion and forgiveness, and diminished his sense of entitlement to "the..." Read more
"...This is an interesting book on an important topic...." Read more
"...7. Great quotes, "Our sense of free will results from a failure to understand this: We do not know what we intend to do until the intention itself..." Read more
"...If for nothing else, Free Will provides much fuel for smart debate and the development of mature ideas." Read more
Customers find the book interesting and a good read. They say it's a decent primer with great points that can be understood in an hour or two.
"...Free Will's concise structure makes this book encouraging to read, despite its controversial material...." Read more
"...14. The implications of not having a free will. Great points!15. A fascinating discussion on the level of responsibility.16...." Read more
"Following in typical Sam-Harris fashion, 'Free Will' is a brilliant, concise treatise on the illusory nature of what he carefully regards as the..." Read more
"...Ultimately, I think this book is a worthwhile read...." Read more
Customers appreciate the writing quality of the book. They find it concise, clear, and readable. The author provides an insightful explanation with cogent language. Overall, readers find the book accessible and well-argued.
"...Sam Harris' bold monograph facilitates this very notion with cogent language, opening your eyes to the nebulas realm of unconsciousness, decision-..." Read more
"...It's a profound essay that is easy to follow but is hard to master. It is so rewarding to read interesting topics from great minds...." Read more
"...in typical Sam-Harris fashion, 'Free Will' is a brilliant, concise treatise on the illusory nature of what he carefully regards as the popular..." Read more
"...book is short (the main text is less than 70 pages), the writing style is very dense so this is by no means a quick read...." Read more
Customers appreciate the book's conciseness. They find it easy to read in a sitting, leaving them with time to consider the topic. The book is compact yet comprehensive, making it portable and suitable for travel. It also seems refreshing and light considering the topic itself.
"...20. Links worked great on the Kindle.21. Brief, powerful essay that can be read multiple times.Negatives:..." Read more
"...Although this book is short (the main text is less than 70 pages), the writing style is very dense so this is by no means a quick read...." Read more
"...My two largest complaints are the brevity of the book (it’s really more of a pamphlet) and Harris’s determination to squeeze free will or its..." Read more
"Short and powerful in its delivery. (Amazon wants more words in this review, and there is no freedom in that)." Read more
Customers find the book engaging and refreshing. They say it's a good discussion of the age-old problem of free will. Readers mention that the book gets their mental gears turning and opens their eyes to a new view on how we make decisions.
"...Free Will's introduction is unsurprisingly brave and captivating...." Read more
"...It is so rewarding to read interesting topics from great minds. This essay is the ultimate appetizer, delicious and with an everlasting aftertaste...." Read more
"...Overall, Harris' argument was entertaining, but fanciful." Read more
"...And the same is true with that last one. And that last one. See? Its fun and a little bit of innocent trouble!" Read more
Customers find the book a good value for money. They say it's short but worth the price, has a great to the point thesis, and is well worth the small investment of time. The book is in good rental condition and an introduction to free will.
"...The book is inexpensive, well written, and a decent primer, so buy it and read it...." Read more
"...Yeah its short. It's an intro. It's also very cheap. If you're still here I've got a fun story...." Read more
"...still, it was still an overall interesting book, and well worth the small investment of time." Read more
"...I thoroughly enjoyed it and it was well worth the price. My only qualm is that the book is a bit short...." Read more
Customers find the book straightforward and logical. They say it's well-organized and easy to read.
"...Not much is explained as far as terminology, but it is well put together in a simple manner...." Read more
"...n't finish it but if you're okay with adopting the ideology it's very well put and informed. Hard to dispute information." Read more
"...This book puts forth an argument which is clear and simple (and it will not make you think, "what's the point of living?") and enjoyable to..." Read more
"...Quick read, not unnecessarily complex, and yet thoroughly convincing...." Read more
Customers find the pacing of the book repetitive and confusing at times. They say the narrative is short and the ideas presented in a repetitive manner.
"...A repetitive, often ridiculous narrative that's dissatisfying and uninformative on every level...." Read more
"...It gets confusing at some point but this is understandable as it's somewhat of a complex topic to put in words." Read more
"...I read it in a single sitting. But on top of being very short, it was very repetitive, it probably could have been nearly half the length...." Read more
"...recently introduced to Sam Harris, but now I'm hooked on his clear, direct, emotion-free analysis and writing style...." Read more
Reviews with images
Great pamphlet, not a book.
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
- Reviewed in the United States on September 29, 2013Don't be fooled by the length of this book, it packs a riveting punch. Think about everything you know about yourself: the choices you've made in life, your feelings and notions, even your mood, and then throw it all away. Sam Harris' bold monograph facilitates this very notion with cogent language, opening your eyes to the nebulas realm of unconsciousness, decision-making, efforts, and intentions. This review is meant to evaluate Free Will and convince you that this book is worthwhile to read. That is, if you are ready to hear what Dr. Harris has to say.
Probably the most impressive aspect of this book is its ability to capture the difficult concept of free will, and articulate it with such finesse that the mundane individual can grasp its meaning. In fact, Free Will's main objective is to destroy this idea of autonomy that has been ingrained in basic human culture. The question of free will "touches nearly everything we care about". The subject of this book is so relevant that according to the author, "if the scientific community were to declare free will an illusion, it would precipitate a culture war far more belligerent than the one that has been waged on the subject of evolution".
Free Will's concise structure makes this book encouraging to read, despite its controversial material. With a degree in philosophy from Stanford University, and a Ph.D. in neuroscience, Dr. Harris is well equipped to enlighten us on such a challenging topic. The book is divided into eight thought out chapters that does a good job of first establishing the relevancy of its subject and then systematically breaking down the "illusion" of free will by attacking it from various angles. Here I have a brief description and opinion on some of the important parts of the book:
Introduction
Free Will's introduction is unsurprisingly brave and captivating. He acknowledges that the claims he makes will undoubtedly receive criticism, and that most people will "find his conclusions abhorrent". So, in order to allure his skeptical audience on such a contentious topic, Dr. Harris uses an equally controversial example on how free will is just an illusion: the Cheshire murders of the Petit family. If you are an individual with a weak stomach, vivid imagination, and sensitive heart, I advise you skip over this part of the book. He is defending the criminals involved in Cheshire murders who were also convicted of rape and abuse. He strives to reduce these acts of blatant horror and moral disregard to products of uncontrollable experience combined with plain neurological mechanisms. Essentially, Dr. Harris says that the murder and rape of Dr. William Petit's wife and two young daughters was not their fault. If this is not enough to catch your attention, I would question your sense of basic human empathy.
Ch. 1-The Unconscious Origins of the Will
Free will is an illusion. This idea is repeated to the reader consistently throughout the book and is the central point that the author strives to drive home. How Dr. Harris relays this idea and tries to disabuse us of a concept that has been so instilled in our mentality is remarkable. Using examples relatable in everyday situations, he intelligibly picks apart our idea that we actually have a freedom of choice. He says, "Our sense of free will results from a failure to understand this: We do not know what we intend to do until the intention itself arises". Where does this intention originate? Dr. Harris claims it comes from our unconsciousness and bolsters his claim with some solid experimental evidence. He boldly states that scientists can have the ability to know what you're about to do seconds before you actually do it. Basically, scientists can read your mind. Read to find out the revealing nature of this evidence.
Ch. 2-Changing the Subject
In this chapter, Dr. Harris switches gears and gives respect to the cohorts out there dedicated to this debate of free will. He mentions the three major philosophical approaches to this issue: determinism, libertarianism, and compatibilism. I appreciate this chapter because for a moment, Dr. Harris separates himself from his personal opinion on the matter, and gives respect to the contending opinions as well. Though later on in his essay, Dr. Harris debunks these philosophies, he gives the reader an opportunity to understand the different opinions on the matter and form his own stance with object descriptions for each branch.
Ch. 3-Cause and Effect
This is perhaps the most scientific portion of the book. "In physical terms, we know that every human action can be reduced to a series of impersonal events: Genes are transcribed, neurotransmitters bind to their receptors, muscle fibers contract, and John Doe pulls the trigger on his gun." What does Dr. Harris describe here exactly? Did he just attribute a seemingly immoral act to plain products of physical mechanisms? Does he believe that the injustice in John Doe's acts lies not in his punitive outcome from the legal system but actually in the nature of the legal system itself? Does Mr. Doe deserve a punishment, or does Dr. Harris infer that if anyone (or anything) were to blame, it would be the simple, impersonal neurological mechanisms in the brain that were not in John's control? Read to find out how the author intriguingly develops his argument.
Ch. 5-Might the Truth Be Bad for Us?
My favorite part of the book involves the author defending how destroying our current idea of free will will not negatively affect the way humans progress through life. In a sense, this is also the most important aspect of the book, for if free will were a necessary illusion, our revilement to it will direct us towards a wrongful path. "Many people worry that free will is a necessary illusion-and that without it we will fail to live creative and fulfilling lives...One study found that having subjects read an argument against free will made them more likely to cheat on a subsequent exam. Another found such subjects to be less helpful and more aggressive." It is apparent that a world without free will is like a guilt-free pass into wrongful doings, but Dr. Harris maintains his stance that our exposure to the "truth" will not be harmful. "It is surely conceivable that knowing certain truths about he human mind could have unfortunate psychological and/or cultural consequences. However, I am not worried about degrading the morality of my readers by publishing this book." Actually, he boasts that losing the sense of free will has only boosted his ethics and increased his feelings of compassion and forgiveness, and diminished his sense of entitlement to "the fruits of [his] own good luck." How does this make sense? Read the books to learn his clear and logical thought process.
The rest of the book is dedicated to our moral responsibility given this convincing argument Dr. Harris lays out on the table, touching on politics, law, religion, public policy, and much more. If you have a few hours to spend, and are feeling intellectually adventurous, I recommend this book. I cannot think of another book so concise, yet so powerful. Beware that the topic discussed in this book is not one for light reading, but one for thought provoking. Read it with an open mind and you will absorb a unique perspective on human nature articulated nicely by a bright scientist well suited for such a topic.
- Reviewed in the United States on April 19, 2019The book’s conclusion is that we do not have free will. In the chapter “Cause and effect” on pages 27 to 30, Sam Harris dismisses the ideas of Martin Heisenberg who argues that we do have free will. I think that both Harris and Heisenberg are correct. I think that the apparent conflict is simply that they have different definitions of free will. For Harris, free will means that a choice between two or more actions should be made consciously. Harris argues that we do not make choices consciously because they have already been made by unconscious mechanisms. I think that Heisenberg would argue that even if the choice is not conscious, we have freely made the choice by unconscious mechanisms. Heisenberg argues that free will is the result of chance events in the brain such as the random release of “vesicles” which transmit signals from one nerve cell to the next in the chain. Harris is critical of this idea, saying “How could the indeterminacy of the initiating event count as the exercise of my free will?”. Below, I will try to present 3 scenarios which I think illustrate how the alternative views of Harris and Heisenberg are compatible, and seem consistent with other views in the book such as the discussion by Tom Clark on Pages 20 to 22.
Scenario 1. I am walking towards a new destination. When I turn a corner, I see that the entrance to the building is hidden directly behind a tree. I need to decide whether to go to the left or right of it but there is no apparent reason to prefer either course. I choose to go to the left, but when I arrive at the entrance, I feel I could have consciously chosen to go to the right. Harris would argue that I would be wrong, the decision had been made unconsciously before I thought I made it consciously. It also seems probable that the decision depended on the random state of my brain just before I felt I made the decision, perhaps even before I turned the corner. But my feeling that I could have chosen to go right was probably correct in another sense – if I had arrived a minute later, my brain would have been in a randomly different state and I might have chosen right rather than left.
Scenario 2. A robot is to be used to check a room or building, of unknown size and shape, for the presence of dangerous radioactive or toxic substances. The robot is placed inside an outside door, which is then closed to prevent the robot escaping to the outside by mistake. Imagine that the program controlling the motion of the robot is deterministic – for example when it strikes a wall or object, it will be reflected in the same way as a rolling ball. In that case, there is a danger that the robot will become stuck in an “infinite loop” if it comes back to the starting point and points in the starting direction. As a simple example, it may head straight for the opposite wall, bounce straight back to the door, and bounce back to its original position, thus repeating this back and forth motion indefinitely (more complicated infinite loops are also possible). A simple solution to this problem is to add a random number generator to the robot’s program so that, for example, when the robot bounces off a wall the return direction is randomized. This will prevent the infinite loop problem and illustrates a simple application of a random choice generator. There are other more sophisticated ways of completely searching a room or building but using a random number generator provides the simplest solution.
Scenario 3. I have moved to a new city and ask my new neighbor where she prefers to shop. She notes that there is a choice of 2 supermarkets, X and Y, but they are in opposite directions so people shop at one or the other. She definitely prefers X. Her judgment seems sound to me, so for several weeks I shop at X. X seems OK to me, but one morning I have the urge to try Y for no apparent reason (perhaps because the random noise in my brain has caused me to favor Y that day). The probable result will be that my neighbor’s opinion will be confirmed and my decision might be seen as a waste of effort. However, there is a small chance, say 10%, that I will be surprised and prefer Y. In that case, I will probably decide to shop at Y all or most of the time. So although the chance of preferring Y was small, the possible gain from finding Y was better can be greater than the probable loss due to finding that X was indeed the better choice, as expected. This illustrates how Heisenberg’s random choice mechanism can be helpful in practice.
In summary, the process of choosing between two (or more) alternative actions may be considered in terms of adding a “signal” and “noise”. The signal is the evidence for preference for one alternative compared with another. In Scenario 1, going left and right were equally preferable so the signal was zero; thus the response would be determined entirely by the noise, with equal probability of left and right. In Scenario 3, the evidence was that supermarket X was better than Y, but the evidence was not so strong that noise from random variations in the brain could not exceed this moderate signal, so Y could be chosen occasionally. As argued above, occasionally choosing the seemingly less preferable alternative can be a sensible choice.
This is an interesting book on an important topic. For those reasons it might deserve 5 stars, but I give it 4 stars because I don’t think it does justice to alternative ideas such as Heisenberg’s.
Top reviews from other countries
-
PabloReviewed in Mexico on September 23, 20245.0 out of 5 stars Tardo un poco en llegar a Mexico pero llego en buenas condiciones.
Tardo un poco en llegar a Mexico pero llego en buenas condiciones.
thiagoReviewed in Brazil on March 27, 20235.0 out of 5 stars THE SIN and free will are The same
Imagination, free will or sin. These are all common sense. These are all ways to try to control you. But if you read this book you will be a little bit more free than were before you read this book.
DHRAQEReviewed in Italy on August 13, 20235.0 out of 5 stars The most important topic we should deal with as human beings
I strongly suggest reading this short but groundbreaking essay: it may not change your mind, but if it does, your worldview will also change completely and forever. Free to choose, right?
caffinedreamsReviewed in the United Kingdom on November 11, 20215.0 out of 5 stars Show that it's very hard, if not impossible, to defend free will naturalisticaly
It's short, assured and to the point and potentially devastating if like me you "believe" in "free will".
I could not rebut him on his own terms but I do not accept his terms.
That said, I think that any non mystical response would have to address his points or at least undermine them.
For my part I think that the idea of free will as an uncaused will never made sense (even for a purported god). From my perspective free will is not simply compatible with an ordered universe (I think determinism is often overstated and Harris is probably in this territory but as he states Chaos does not help free will advocates) but depends on it.
In short the will that I have is always bound to me in a context that precedes my choices but is not completely removed from them. It is not FREE in some unbounded mystical sense but it is still my will and is free to the degree that the outcomes I achieve are congruent with my desires.
Did I chose those desires: no but that does not seem critical to me so long as I feel they were not imposed on me by a third party and I think this is what most of us mean.
Science done by other humans with other desires says otherwise but if their choices are as predetermined as mine then their belief is not qualitively different from mine. In both cases the belief is a product of forces beyond our control...
That's not to deny the power of science but a tool that has evolved to study the world by removing human subjectivity may not be the best tool for guiding human belief and human action in a universe where our becoming is no less a part of the structure of reality than the movements of particles or the interactions of fields.
Indeed the way that science undertands these things cannot be understood without recognising the role of agency and will in that process.
-
FabriceReviewed in France on September 13, 20195.0 out of 5 stars Révélation
J'ai acheté ce livre à la suite de la vision d'une vidéo sur youtube de Sam Harris. Certainement contre-intuitif et je me suis retrouvé comme une poule ayant trouvé un os: décontenancé. Plusieurs années après, je suis toujours à la recherche du contraire. C'est devenu un jeu puisque tout contribue à confirmer l'absence de libre arbitre.







