In the persistent dance between determinism and free will, the emergence of embedded agency offers a fascinating twist. Hard determinism, the view that the state of the universe is the consequence of antecedent states in accordance with the laws of nature, ostensibly precludes the existence of free will. However, the theory of embedded agency — the understanding that any decision-making entity is fundamentally inseparable from the environment it seeks to navigate — injects an element of intractability that keeps the notion of free will firmly in play.

The Deterministic Universe

The laws of classical physics, which have been a subject of human understanding since the concept of Laplace's demon was introduced, describe a universe governed by a clear-cut cause-and-effect relationship. In this model, if one knew the position and momentum of every particle at one moment, they could predict the future with perfect accuracy. This notion underpins what's often referred to as a 'clockwork universe', where everything follows a predetermined path. Such a deterministic view seems to leave little room for what's known in philosophy as 'libertarian free will' — the idea that individuals have the capacity to make choices freely, choices that are not predestined by previous events or by randomness.

Embedded Agency and Its Implications

Now, consider the concept of 'embedded agency', which has become a significant point of discussion in artificial intelligence and is also relevant to understanding human decision-making. An 'agent', in this context, refers to any entity that makes decisions, such as a person or an AI system. When we say an agent is 'embedded', we mean it is a part of the very environment it is trying to navigate and influence. Because of this, an agent cannot step outside the system to gain a complete overview; it's limited by the same rules and knowledge available within that system. This limitation is not just a current technological challenge but rather a fundamental constraint similar to mathematical phenomena like Gödel's incompleteness theorems, which show the limits of what can be proven within a given mathematical system, or the Halting problem, which deals with the impossibility of determining, in every case, whether a computer program will eventually stop running or continue forever.

Recent empirical research in neurobiology complicates this picture. Studies utilizing real-time brain imaging, like those conducted by Soon et al., have begun to reveal the micro-mechanisms behind decision-making processes, sometimes predicting a subject's choice before they are consciously aware of it. Additionally, research by Fried et al (2011) has identified specific neurons that become active prior to conscious decision-making.

This bridges the abstract philosophical debate and tangible, observable phenomena. While agents — whether artificial or organic — appear compelled to act as if they possess free will, these studies hint at a rich tapestry of deterministic processes and predictive complexities. This gives credence to the theory that our sensation of free will may stem from the inherent delays in self-awareness of our decision-making apparatus, rather than an actual capacity to act independent of causality.

The Paradox at Play

Herein lies the paradox: while the laws of physics dictate determinism, the practical impossibility of perfect self-reflection preserves the phenomenological experience of making choices. This isn't to argue for dualism or for some supernatural exemption from physical laws, but to highlight a quirk of complexity — the more an agent becomes capable of complex computation, the less it's able to predict its own future, ironically restoring the 'freedom' determinism seeks to abolish.

The Quantum Question

The interplay of quantum mechanics with our understanding of the universe introduces yet another layer of complexity. Quantum mechanics is a field of physics that, at its core, operates on principles of probability rather than certainty. This stands in stark contrast to the deterministic universe suggested by classical physics, raising questions about the predictability of events at the most fundamental level. Even if we were to accept the notion that the behavior of particles is fundamentally indeterminate — as quantum theory suggests — the challenges posed by embedded agency do not simply vanish. In fact, the inherent unpredictability of quantum states complicates the task even further, making the prediction of an agent's future actions — which could be influenced by quantum events — an even more daunting computational task

Concluding Thoughts

"No Escape from Free Will" is not a statement of defiance against the laws of nature but an acknowledgment of our operational reality. As embedded agents, we are bound to the wheel of causality, yet paradoxically, this binding engenders an experience indistinguishable from free will. The deterministic universe precludes true freedom, but embedded agency ensures that we live the illusion in its fullest sense, complete with the weight of choices and the burden of responsibility.

The paradox of determinism and embedded agency isn't just a philosophical curiosity; it is a beacon for further exploration in cognitive science, AI development, and the philosophy of mind. It demands we reconsider how we conceive of freedom and agency, not as binary absolutes, but as complex phenomena emerging from the fabric of a deterministic universe riddled with the complexities of embedded existence.

(written with the help of ChatGPT)

New to LessWrong?

New Comment