Is there such a thing as free will?

Are we free to make decisions about our lives? In this, self-knowledge is key.

Can we freely decide on our own actions? This question has been latent for as long as humanity could be considered as such. Philosophers like Plato already explored these concepts centuries ago with the means at their disposal.

It seems a simple question to answer, but it should not be so simple when it is a question that is latent in the entire legal structure that shapes modern societies. In order to decide whether someone is responsible for an action or not, the first thing to elucidate is whether he had the capacity to understand what he was doing and, then, whether he had the possibility of making a different decision. The principle of innocence derives from this precept. What seems to be clear is that it is not so easy to know the answer. Perhaps neuroscience can help us shed some light on this question.

Libet and his research on decisions

A few years ago, a researcher named Libet tested people's ability to identify in real time the decision that has been made. His conclusions were clear; up to almost a second before the subject became aware of his own decision, the researchers already knew what it was going to be based on the activity of their neurons..

However, Libet also discovered that, before executing the decision, there was a small period of time in which that action could be "vetoed", i.e., not executed. Libet's experiments have been extended and refined by some of his disciples over the years, and his findings have been repeatedly confirmed.

These discoveries shook the basis of what had hitherto been considered free will.. If my brain is capable of making decisions before I myself am aware of them, how can I be responsible for anything I do?

The problem of free will

Let's look a little closer at the neuroscience underlying this problem. Our brain is a machine evolutionarily selected to process information, make decisions based on it, and make decisions based on it.and make decisions based on it, and to act as quickly, efficiently and resource-efficiently as possible. For this reason, the brain tends to automate as much as possible the different responses it encounters.

From this point of view there would seem to be no free will and we would be more like an automaton; a very complex one, yes, but an automaton after all.

But, on the other hand, the brain is also an organ with the capacity to analyze and understand its own internal processes, which, in turn, would allow it to develop new mental processes that would act on itself and modify the responses it already had automated.

This approach would thus transfer the possibility of the existence of free will to the greater or lesser capacity we have to acquire knowledge of ourselves. acquire knowledge of ourselvesand new habits capable of modifying our own responses. This approach, therefore, would open the door to the possible existence of free will.

The importance of self-knowledge

Here, the reflection we would have to make then is: if we want to be freer and make better decisions, we should be able to start by "making the decision" to try to get to know ourselves better. and thus have the opportunity to develop new mental processes that act on our own mind and allow us to better manage our own responses. In a word, self-knowledge.

This is quite similar to the famous saying that crowned the entrance to the Temple of Delphi in Greece, "Nosce te ipsum", or "know thyself" and you will know the world. True freedom is only achieved when we manage to free ourselves from ourselves.

But, giving a further twist to the subject... what does it depend on if we decide to start the process of self-discovery? Does it depend on something external, such as the opportunity for someone to make us reflect on it? And if that does not happen... does our free will then depend on luck?

I think this is a good point to leave open for discussion and exploration in future articles.