Free: Why Science Hasn't Disproved Free Will 1st Edition

I gather from what is said in this little book that Dr. Mele has written a few other books on the subject of free will, books that I have not read. This is not so much a philosophical examination of free will as what might be called a "review of experimental literature" on the subject.

In chapter one, Mele explains what he means by "free will" and describes a sort of "light", "medium", and "heavy" version of it. The light version is something like what philosophers call Compatibilism; you are able to make rational and informed decisions so long as you are not subject to coercion. The medium variation is closer to what philosophers call "libertarian free will"; multiple options are not only open to your future, but you could choose any of them even in situations where the prior and current conditions would not change. The last is heavy not because it is in some sense more free than the medium but because it is tied to God and an individual's soul which, in this case, is supposed to have powers not stemming from our make up as biological beings resting on a purely physical foundation. Dr. Mele is non-committal on the subject of souls, but he says that he isn't going to discuss that sort of freedom limiting himself to more materialistic conceptions.

In chapter two and three Mele describes well known experiments in neurophysiology that purport to demonstrate free will is an illusion. He covers the experimental set up, the results, and their interpretation. In chapters four and five he does the same with experiments from the fields of psychology and sociology. In each case, he points out how the conclusions of many of the interpreters of the experimental results (not always the experimenters themselves) to the effect that free will is an illusion are unfounded.

With regard to the neurophysiology experiments, he main criticism is that the experimental conditions simply do not represent what we do or how we operate in "real life" which is more complex and often goal directed, something altogether missing from the physiology experiments and artificially constrained in the psycho-social studies. In the case of the psychology and sociology experiments Mele notes correctly that the experiments are really not about free will per se, but rather about what other factors, influences, impinge on our decisions which may, nevertheless, retain a real freedom even if only in some small component of a choice. One experiment involving a freely chosen "prior intention" supports the reality of free will directly. Mele does not deny that we are influenced by the sum and substance of our life histories. He denies that these influences preclude all freedom.

It isn't until chapter six that Mele gets a little philosophical and asks which of his variations on free will, the light or the medium, can still be plausibly supported given all of the various experimental results. He argues that his "light version" is certainly not ruled out by any of the experimental results, and directly supported by "prior intention" experiments, while the "medium version" remains an open issue, neither ruled out or directly supported by any of the work he reviews. Since I am a free will advocate and except for the "prior intention" work, have encountered all of these experiments in other books, I have no objection to any of his conclusions. I think it would be profitable for Mele to read N. Rescher's "Free Will: A Philosophical Reappraisal" which also supports what he calls the "medium version".

To sum up, if you are interested in a quick and easy to read examination of the main body of experiments on the subject from physiology, psychology, and sociology, this book would be a good review for you.

Pretty short, mostly casual level exploration of the most prominent scientific challenges to free will. If you want detailed rigorous philosophy, you would do well to look at Mele's other books. This one is by comparison an easy-to-read version of the topic, not that that is a bad thing. Still, the ideas are good and the points made clear and compelling. Highly recommended as an intro to the subject.

Short, clear well written treatment of a contentious and complex issue. Great place to start if you want to understand the debate over free will.

Mele has written an extremely accessible introduction to and critique of the hallmark experiments that are bandied about in the popular press as 'evidence' against free will. He convincingly shows that the experiments, though interesting in themselves, suffer from several difficulties when pressed into service as evidence against free will.

There are some broad generalisations bordering on fallacies in the book, most notably in the section discussing the behavioural experiments. That, in the prison experiments, some guards did not behave inhumanely does not show that we have free will - I don't think anti free will proponents would claim that every human being in the same situation would do the same thing. But perhaps there are those who would make such ambitious claims?

Mele also spends the final chapter hammering home (in a gentle way) the importance of clarifying definitions in discussions like these. It seems that many prominent anti free will proponents have in mind some sort of completely Cartesian immaterial basis for free will, and take any evidence for material influences on decision making as proof against free will. Apparently, most people don't associate such a view with the term 'free will', and what has been disproven by the experiments is only an extreme form of free will.

Overall, an excellent laymans introduction to the issue. Accessible, and does not descend into the breathless histrionics that are characteristic of most "science" writing.

Excelent seller and book!

A concise and quick book that has great clarity and stays engaging to the end.

Non-fanatic analysis of prevailing beliefs and truths.

The so-called "science" against free will is on very shaky ground. Meek shows why in a very readable book. Well worth reading for it insights