MailChimp

Showing posts sorted by relevance for query "free will". Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query "free will". Sort by date Show all posts

Monday, March 27, 2023

So you think you can Free Will?

Dido - "Life for Rent


I talk a fair amount about consciousness, mindfulness, and free will in Losing My Religions. In his book Free Will, in this talk, and in the Waking Up app (example), Sam Harris examines the issue in great detail. Given that our alleged free will is central to our sense of self (for most of us) I think it is worth spending time at least listening to that talk.

But for now, just try these exercises:

If you have free will, count backward from 60 as I inject you with the anesthetic propofol. Or stay sober on a high dose of psilocybin. Or free will yourself to stay awake the next 72 hours. 

More importantly, simply choose to be happy and content and kind every waking moment. 

If we had free will, why would we ever choose to be angry, vengeful, jealous, hateful, or Republican?

As I quote Arthur Schopenhauer at the head of my BrainsI BRAINS! chapter of Losing My Religions: 

Man can do what he wants but he cannot will what he wills.

I bring this up because I saw another smart and highly-educated individual saying he knew he had free will because he could feel it. (And hand-waving about quantum mechanics.) 

To be sure, I'm not saying that you need to realize we do not have free will to be happy. But for all the reasons I explain in Losing My Religions, I do think internalizing the basic fact that everyone is simply following their programming makes it much easier to be happy (at least happier). I also believe recognizing our true nature is a necessary step to "enlightenment." 

Monday, October 21, 2024

Five Minutes to Change Your Life. No Joke.


Put yourself in a position where you don't need to do anything and have no distractions.

Now, use your free will to choose to think no thoughts at all for just five minutes*.

If you're like me or anyone I know (including heavy meditators), you won't be able to clear your mind. Thoughts will just ... occur. 

The implications of this are many and profound. But even before considering what this means, take a second to note how powerful it is to notice the lack of control. 

Most people assert they have free will because they can feel it. But experiencing thoughts thinking themselves despite our "conscious choice" is simple but indisputable proof of our lack of control over our thoughts. (More examples if needed.)

This is difficult to even consider, let alone accept and internalize. I've heard many smart people insist they have free will; on a podcast I heard recently, a brilliant person contended they "could not go on" if they didn't have free will. But of course they can. It is exactly like saying we know there is a god and we couldn't go on if there weren't. 

I've said a great deal about the implications of recognizing we have no free will; I think this is the single best post. Personally, I'll be trying to draw on those insights in the coming days and weeks.

* From here:

If you have free will, count backward from 60 as I inject you with the anesthetic propofol. Or stay sober on a high dose of psilocybin. Or free will yourself to stay awake the next 72 hours. 

More importantly, simply choose to be happy and content and kind every waking moment. Choose to be a perfect spouse, child, parent. Choose to be everything you say you want to be.

If we had free will, why would we ever "choose" to be angry, vengeful, jealous, hateful, or Republican?

More on this in the "Brains!" chapter of Losing My Religionswhich you can read for free.

Tuesday, September 12, 2023

Infinite Capacity to Hand-Wave

Rush - Freewill 

Nihilism

Cleveland Amory once said, “Man has an infinite capacity to rationalize – especially when it comes to what he wants to eat.” (He wasn't a vegetarian, so he knew of what he spoke.)

As I've noted elsewhere, we all have our blindspots. We all have things we want to believe and will accept the most absurd arguments if they tell us what we want to hear.

This came up when Anne and I recently listened to two very educated individuals (one the head of a college) discuss free will. The guest contended that we have free will because 1. Computer programs can be so complicated that you have to run them to find out what they do, and 2. Chaos. Thus, since you can't predict what someone is going to do ... [hand-waving] ... free will. 

Nice.

Obviously, if you just stop to think about it, the fact that we don't know exactly what will happen when we run a very complicated computer program doesn't mean the program has free will. Because a butterfly's wingflap can change the weather doesn't mean the wing or weather has free will.

I've written ad nauseam about free will. That isn't because I think people are stupid to believe (it sure feels like we are in control) but because I think people will be much happier if we realize that everything is just matter and energy following the laws of physics. Holding on to the illusion of free will doesn't make life better ... and it doesn't help us make the world a better place.

PS: James Gleick's Chaos is a really interesting book. (At least in my memory from 25 years ago.)

Friday, February 21, 2025

Free Will is the New Jesus


It is ... let's say "amusing" ... to hear so many big-brained intellectuals tie themselves into knots claiming they have free will. These are highly-educated individuals, who would (and sometimes do) mock people who believe in a magic friend in the sky. But they insist over and over that they have magic in their heads - magic that somehow creates a causeless cause that overrides the laws of physics.

On Armchair Expert, Dax Shepherd makes the comparison of god(s) and free will in his conversation with Robert Sapolsky. Dax - a huge fan of Sapolsky who thinks Behave* is one of the best books ever - noted that people make some of the same arguments for free will that others make for god(s). 

Like many, Dax will go part of the way, accepting that, say, criminals who had terrible lives aren't responsible for their actions. But he, Dax, does have free will. 

It all comes down to feelings. We like feeling that an all-powerful being loves us (and will give us life after death). We like feeling that we are in control. We like being able to blame others for their "bad choices." We like feeling that we have earned and deserve our awards, accomplishments, and accolades. "It isn't luck! It's my hard work!" 

And, of course, we feel like we are in control, as long as we don't examine that too closely. (Seriously - don't click that link if you want your feelings to remain your "reality.")

So I don't (and can't!) blame anyone for refusing to give up their preferred personal magic. However, their fears are misplaced. Accepting reality can make us happier, as well as more understanding. 

* After writing Behave, people told Sapolsky, "Oh, I don't know about this. It might make people doubt free will." Saposky's reaction was "Might??" That led him to stop being subtle and write Determined: A Science of Life Without Free Will.

Tuesday, June 20, 2023

Enlightenment June 2023: Preface – Pre-Existing Constraints (part 1 of 3)



This post is a brief overview of some of the ideas in
Losing My Religions as a preface to the next two posts.


To have the best life possible, understanding our world and ourselves more honestly is important. (Unless you can really live a lie, which is possible.)  

The Genes that Tie and Bind

We humans are not equipped to see things as they actually are. Our genes have built us to get more copies of themselves (our genes) into the future; these “selfish” genes will program us – their vessel – to do whatever it takes to maximize this outcome. This includes, but is not limited to: 

  • The craving for “more” – more calories, more stuff, more money, more status; 
  • The drive to have sex, the love of / desire for babies;
  • The inability to see the world clearly or understand ourselves. 

(Obviously, we don’t all share exactly the same drives to the exact same extent.) 

I talk about this and the below in Losing My Religions; Robert Wright covers this in more detail in The Moral Animal and Why Buddhism Is True.

Our families have also programmed us. Not to be happy and fulfilled – oh no, no, no – but to do what they want (except in rare exceptions). In short, those genetically related to us are programmed by their genes to want us to propagate the genes we share with them. 

It’s selfish genes all the way down.

Some people have kids to fulfill their drive to procreate, and many (but not all) also want love from their children. (“Some people have kids and want those children to be happy. Others have children and want the kids to make them happy.”)

The above can be incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to recognize and, if necessary, overcome. 


Religion – The Great Obfuscator

Then we have society. 

Perhaps the most insidious lie foisted upon us by our society is one our family also programs into us: religion. Our ties to family make it stranglingly difficult to even question the faith in which we are raised, let alone free ourselves and see the universe more clearly. 

Which religion is programmed into our synapses depends on where and when we’re born. Recognizing that particular fact can be helpful in freeing us from the shackles and torture of our parents’ beliefs – there is no reason to think that our mother and/or father just happen to have the right view of god(s) when the vast majority of humans have believed something else.

Once we recognize that our parents don’t have a monopoly on cosmic truth, it is still difficult to clear the stained glass completely. The vast majority of people believe in some form of god(s); making belief without evidence the norm. In addition, we understandably want to feel like the universe is not a “cold, uncaring, and meaningless place,” which is what some people fear would be the case without god(s). 

Additionally, we have the solace faith can provide us in the face of death. 

Despite all this, no actual evidence gives us reason to believe in any “higher power.” True, we don’t currently understand how the Big Bang came about. But if we think everything had to be created, and thus the Big Bang must have been created, then what created the Big Bang’s creator? At least we have evidence of the Big Bang, and it is a falsifiable theory. 

Additionally, think about everything else that was previously unknown and used to justify belief in god(s). Now we understand what the Sun and Earth are and how they came to be, for example, as well as how the diversity of life evolved. 

We haven’t learned these things through faith, of course. Religions have thwarted the advancement of human knowledge. The imprisonment of Galileo for noting that the Earth isn’t the center of the universe is only one example. The general “it’s god’s will” anti-science attitude has caused so much suffering. (Another topic in Losing.)

Although we can’t, of course, prove a negative (“no god(s) exist”) we have no reason to have any affirmative belief, especially not one that affects how we live.


Free Will – The Greatest Illusion

We do, however, have reason to believe we have free will. It totally feels like we are in control, actively controlling our thoughts and driving our actions. Showing that free will is an illusion is beyond the scope of one blog post. Even though I am not down with him on many things (just search this blog for his name), Sam Harris is very good on the topic. Here is a post that introduces his short book on the topic; here is a short video; here is a longer video.

Recognizing that free will is an illusion – a nearly perfect illusion – is astonishingly difficult. Possibly harder than giving up god(s). This isn’t just because we feel like we have free will, but also because many people think they would not be an individual if they weren’t “in control.” 

This can seem scary, but really isn’t. In my experience, giving up the illusion of free will is a necessary but not sufficient insight for enlightenment – the topic of my next (shorter) blog post. Accepting that free will can’t exist is the heavy lift, and is the one topic I think is worth your time to explore, starting with the three previous links: a post that introduces his short book on the topic; a short videoa longer video

Monday, September 29, 2025

Human Nature Is Masochism

"Being happy is easy, hooman!"

Most things I worry 'bout
Never happen anyway
-Tom Petty, "Crawling Back to You"


I continue to find this (clear your mind for just five minutes) to be definitive proof that we don't have free will. 

To expand on that:

Everyone I have ever known has many unhappy thoughts and negative feelings. If they have free will, they are, to a person, masochists. 

Many reply: "How can I be happy when the world is so terrible?"* That's easy! Just use your free will to choose to always be happy! Blaming the state of the world for your thoughts and feelings proves my point that we don't have free will. 

This is not to say, "You're all stupid!" I know it absolutely feels like we have free will. And moment-to-moment, we function as though we have free will. 

I harp on this because we can be happier by realizing that no one has free will. And the happier we are, the better the world is. 

*There is also the rationalization that being smart is better than being happy. Back when I was smart (relative to the people in my cow-forsaken cowtown) and unhappy, I bought into that fantasy. But that is wrong - not the least because being unhappy is a huge turn-off to others. If we want the world to be better, we can't isolate ourselves and repulse others. More.

Wednesday, October 25, 2023

Determinism -> Liberation and Compassion (Free Will Links)

Bob Geldof - Thinking Voyager 2 Type Things


Last week, Anne and I briefly hung out with a friend who found "we have no free will" to be destructive. Immediately after that meeting ended, I came across this Kevin Drum post, "Free will is mankind’s biggest myth" which linked over to the LA Times' "Stanford scientist [Robert Sapolsky], after decades of study, concludes: We don’t have free will."

In the article, of course, there are people who argue that realizing we have no free will is harmful, in much the same way many argue that realizing there are no gods is harmful. (Why the two topics were intertwined for me, as discussed in Losing.)

But as I explained in "Enlightenment June 2023: Emptiness and Freedom," my experience (and Anne's) is that recognizing determinism is absolutely freeing. My main mental task is trying to more fully internalize this fact. 

(I think that is one of the most important pieces I've ever written. Of course I do! But also of course, I could be wrong. I've been wrong many, many times.... But I could do no other at those times.)

From the Times article:

Before epilepsy was understood to be a neurological condition, people believed it was caused by the moon, or by phlegm in the brain. They condemned seizures as evidence of witchcraft or demonic possession, and killed or castrated sufferers to prevent them from passing tainted blood to a new generation.

Today we know epilepsy is a disease. By and large, it’s accepted that a person who causes a fatal traffic accident while in the grip of a seizure should not be charged with murder.

That’s good, says Stanford University neurobiologist Robert Sapolsky. That’s progress. But there’s still a long way to go. ...

The greatest risk of abandoning free will, Sapolsky concedes, isn’t that we’ll want to do bad things. It’s that, without a sense of personal agency, we won’t want to do anything.

“It may be dangerous to tell people that they don’t have free will,” Sapolsky said. “The vast majority of the time, I really think it’s a hell of a lot more humane.”

Sapolsky knows he won’t persuade most of his readers. ... 

His true hope, he says, is to increase compassion. Maybe if people understand how thoroughly an early history of trauma can rewire a brain, they’ll stop lusting for harsh punishments. Maybe if someone realizes they have a brain condition like depression or ADHD, they’ll stop hating themselves for struggling with tasks that seem easier for others....

We are machines, Sapolsky argues, exceptional in our ability to perceive our own experiences and feel emotions about them. It is pointless to hate a machine for its failures.

Thursday, December 21, 2023

Dan Dennett is an arrogant asshole (Also: you don't need free will to be "good")


Happy Solstice!

Many years ago (before we moved to Tucson) I read one of "philosopher" Dan Dennett's books where he claimed that only humans and dogs were conscious, so we can do anything to any other animal we want. 

Isn't that convenient?

He also thinks the hard problem of consciousness doesn't exist. This seems to me like an incredible failure of understanding, or just contrarian arrogance.

More recently, I heard him on a podcast saying that yes, we can know exactly what it is like to be another person. Not some general idea, or even what they are thinking and what they are feeling. Rather, we can know what it is actually like to be them having their own individual subjective experience. 

Yeesh.

Now I'm finally reading Robert Sapolsky's Determined. In it, he quotes Dennett claiming that "luck evens out" for everyone, thus, no one has any excuse for anything. 

FU, Dan, you POS.

In  Jerry Coyne's piece on Determined (actually from this, but found at Why Evolution Is True):

Sapolsky is especially critical of compatibilist Daniel Dennett, who has claimed that “luck averages out in the long run.” He responds in characteristically plain-spoken style:

No it doesn’t. Suppose you’re born a crack baby. In order to counterbalance this bad luck, does society rush in to ensure that you’ll be raised in relative affluence and with various therapies to overcome your neurodevelopmental problems? No, you are overwhelmingly likely to be born into poverty and stay there. Well then, says society, at least let’s make sure your mother is loving, is stable, has lots of free time to nurture you with books and museum visits. Yeah, right; as we know your mother is likely to be drowning in the pathological consequences of her own miserable luck in life, with a good chance of leaving you neglected, abused, shuttled through foster homes. Well, does society at least mobilize then to counterbalance that additional bad luck, ensuring you live in a safe neighborhood with excellent schools? Nope, your neighborhood is likely to be gang-riddled and your school underfunded.

The entire piece and the quoted review are worth reading (especially the Massachusetts' friend story in the former - yikes) while you wait for Determined to be available at the library. (It is actually one of the very very few books we purchased (on Kindle).) More from the review:

In coming to terms with determinism and the science behind it, Sapolsky urges [that] we shouldn’t deny the reality of our own causal powers or of our own local control. We don’t need to be exceptions to cause and effect, or ultimately self-caused, to be potent causers and controllers in our own right, and to be held responsible in a forward-looking way that helps to shape behavior for the good. Reliable causal relations between desire, deliberation, intention, and action need to be in place for us to be effective agents.... Seen in this light, determinism is not a bitter pill, not a derogation of human dignity or power, but the very key to agency. ...

Sapolsky reassures us that fostering disbelief in libertarian freedom will not result in moral anarchy. Just as atheists can be good without God, so too can skeptics about the unconditional ability to do otherwise. ...

Acceptance of determinism will depend in large part on how it’s portrayed: not as an affront to a realistic conception of autonomy, but its basis. Not as fatalism, but as key to effective action informed by greater knowledge of the causal and explanatory relations that govern behavior. Not as a blanket excuse, but as an evidence-based view of wrongdoing that will lead to a more humane criminal justice system. Not as universally true, given that indeterminism might exist in nature, but as a pragmatically useful perspective that affords us greater compassion and control, a secure basis on which to understand ourselves in service to human and planetary flourishing.

Determinism is unlikely to go viral any time soon given its image as the enemy of freedom, but that perception may shift as the incoherence of libertarian free will becomes apparent, and as the evidence for our complete inclusion in the causal order grows. Sapolsky has marshalled a compelling case for such inclusion, presented it with unconventional flair, and shown the practical and ethical advantages of taking determinism to heart. His persistence in seeing Determined to completion – a prodigious undertaking – is much to be congratulated, although he would disavow deserving any such praise. Even if he’s right about that, we’re still lucky to have him.

Even if you already believe there is no free will, or even if you are sure you won't change your mind, the book is fantastic in discussing how the mind works.

Wednesday, June 21, 2023

Enlightenment June 2023: Emptiness and Freedom (part 2 of 3)



Part 1  |  Part 3 

In Why Buddhism Is True, Robert Wright quotes a teacher saying that you shouldn’t try to intellectually understand the Buddhist concept of emptiness, because if you make the attempt, your head would explode.

I disagree.


Recognizing Our Simplicity

We humans have proven ourselves capable of incredible illusions. From believing in god speaking to us and transubstantiation to suffering the delusion that we are living in the end times and the Dunning-Kruger effect, our brains do not see the world clearly. We can’t even comprehend how bad it is. (Doubt that?)

Although we can’t be sure we aren’t living in a simulation, all testable evidence indicates that the universe is simply matter and energy following (a certain set of) the laws of physics. (“A certain set of” because there could be other universes where the laws are different.)

We don’t understand how the chemical interactions of our brain’s ~1.4 x 10^26 atoms give rise to conscious, subjective experience. But we do know that we can manipulate consciousness in specific ways by manipulating the brain’s atoms' interactions. This gives every reason to believe that consciousness is an emergent property of specific arrangements of matter and energy, but still subject to the laws of physics (and the emergent rules of chemistry, biology, physiology). 

Everything we think, everything we feel, everything we do – all of it is, at the core, the interactions of atoms. Nothing more.

Recognizing this undermines the illusion of free will. But this insight isn’t (entirely) a loss, just as it isn’t (entirely) a loss to give up religion, or to understand the evolutionary basis of love, sex, and reproduction. Realizing the materialist, reductionist nature of the universe is yet another gain – a clearer understanding of reality. And that better understanding can help us lead a better life.


The First Gain: Freedom (of a sort)

The first insight is into ourselves. Since everything is chemical reactions, we can’t be the driver of our thoughts and feelings. Consciousness is along for the ride. Our bodies feel emotions – hunger, fear, desire – as a way to understand the world and motivate “appropriate” behavior. Many things are going on in our body / brain to keep us alive; consciousness shines the spotlight of attention on one part of our otherwise unconscious thoughts and feelings to allow us to “think” more on that topic. We don’t “choose” what to think about.

This is the great insight from mindfulness meditation – recognizing that our minds don’t actually work the way we assume they do. Thoughts think themselves.

But we don’t have to be the feeling or the thought. Once we realize thoughts think themselves and feelings are messages, we don’t have to identify with them if we don’t want to. That is: these insights and mindfulness can reprogram our brains to recognize thoughts and feelings for what they are. Thoughts and feelings are not who we are.

More concretely: we don’t have to be “angry.” We don’t have to "be" anything.

Anger can arise, we can recognize it, and then “choose” to let it go. "I recognize I am experiencing anger" vs "I am angry."

Conversely, we can recognize good fortune, experience gratitude, and “choose” to embrace the experience of that feeling.

As Sam Harris notes:

“Losing a belief in free will has not made me a fatalist – in fact, it has increased my feelings of freedom. My hopes, fears, and neuroses seem less personal and indelible. … Becoming sensitive to the background causes of one’s thoughts and feelings can paradoxically allow for greater creative control over one's life. This understanding reveals you to be a biochemical puppet, of course, but it also allows you to grab hold of one of your strings.”


The Second Gain: Emptiness toward Enlightenment

The second insight is the first applied to the broader world.

Everything in the universe is simply matter and energy following the laws of physics. There is no “good” or “bad.” Everything is empty of meaning, value, and emotional valence, except what our consciousness assigns to it

And with enough understanding, training, and reprogramming, we can “choose” not to assign anything to anything, except what makes our lives better.

It goes without saying: this is difficult. But the reality is that the rude cashier is just a collection of atoms constrained by the laws of physics. Ted Cruz is just following his genetic and societal programming. The chicken farmer, the person picking their toes on the train, the driver revving his unmuffled car – at the core, just collections of atoms, empty of any inherent meaning.

So instead of reacting with disdain, hatred, or mockery, we don’t have to react at all. Or we can “choose” to react with joy that we aren’t that person. Or we can “choose” compassion. Or we can “choose” to try to figure out actions that may help change a situation that is causing suffering in others – and we can make this choice without allowing ourselves to suffer. 

(And of course, when I say “choose,” I mean “use insights from others and our experiences to reprogram our neural net so we react differently in the future.”) 


Simply Another Way of Interacting with the World

We don’t start out knowing how to type, use a cellphone, or speak a language. We don’t simply “decide” to have those and other skills. But if something in our lives leads to the knowledge and training necessary, we can interact with the world in a new way. 

Learning a new language is perhaps the best example. People can speak German to me and I am unable to react in any positive, constructive way (unless they get a laugh from my idiotic grin). But because of an external factor (an excellent teacher in college) Anne “chose” to put in the time to learn and practice German, and now she has a new way of interacting with the world.

If you are reading this, it is likely that you have a similar ability – the ability to gain the knowledge and do the training necessary to achieve something closer to “enlightenment.” Put simply: 

By recognizing the illusion of free will and pursuing the right training / reprogramming, we can develop something much more like free will than we have now. We can take hold of one of the strings that currently makes our life worse than it needs to be. We can stop simply reacting and instead interact, with more control over our feelings.

In short: giving up free will and embracing emptiness can make life much better. 

Friday, January 19, 2024

Best Post of 2023 (IMHO) Enlightenment: Emptiness and Freedom (part 2 of 3)



Part 1  |  Part 3 

In Why Buddhism Is True, Robert Wright quotes a teacher saying that you shouldn’t try to intellectually understand the Buddhist concept of emptiness, because if you make the attempt, your head would explode.

I disagree.


Recognizing Our Simplicity

We humans have proven ourselves capable of incredible illusions. From believing in god speaking to us and transubstantiation to suffering the delusion that we are living in the end times and the Dunning-Kruger effect, our brains do not see the world clearly. We can’t even comprehend how bad it is. (Doubt that?)

Although we can’t be sure we aren’t living in a simulation, all testable evidence indicates that the universe is simply matter and energy following (a certain set of) the laws of physics. (“A certain set of” because there could be other universes where the laws are different.)

We don’t understand how the chemical interactions of our brain’s ~1.4 x 10^26 atoms give rise to conscious, subjective experience. But we do know that we can manipulate consciousness in specific ways by manipulating the brain’s atoms' interactions. This gives every reason to believe that consciousness is an emergent property of specific arrangements of matter and energy, but still subject to the laws of physics (and the emergent rules of chemistry, biology, physiology). 

Everything we think, everything we feel, everything we do – all of it is, at the core, the interactions of atoms. Nothing more.

Recognizing this undermines the illusion of free will. But this insight isn’t (entirely) a loss, just as it isn’t (entirely) a loss to give up religion, or to understand the evolutionary basis of love, sex, and reproduction. Realizing the materialist, reductionist nature of the universe is yet another gain – a clearer understanding of reality. And that better understanding can help us lead a better life.


The First Gain: Freedom (of a sort)

The first insight is into ourselves. Since everything is chemical reactions, we can’t be the driver of our thoughts and feelings. Consciousness is along for the ride. Our bodies feel emotions – hunger, fear, desire – as a way to understand the world and motivate “appropriate” behavior. Many things are going on in our body / brain to keep us alive; consciousness shines the spotlight of attention on one part of our otherwise unconscious thoughts and feelings to allow us to “think” more on that topic. We don’t “choose” what to think about.

This is the great insight from mindfulness meditation – recognizing that our minds don’t actually work the way we assume they do. Thoughts think themselves.

But we don’t have to be the feeling or the thought. Once we realize thoughts think themselves and feelings are messages, we don’t have to identify with them if we don’t want to. That is: these insights and mindfulness can reprogram our brains to recognize thoughts and feelings for what they are. Thoughts and feelings are not who we are.

More concretely: we don’t have to be “angry.” We don’t have to "be" anything.

Anger can arise, we can recognize it, and then “choose” to let it go. "I recognize I am experiencing anger" vs "I am angry."

Conversely, we can recognize good fortune, experience gratitude, and “choose” to embrace the experience of that feeling.

As Sam Harris notes:

“Losing a belief in free will has not made me a fatalist – in fact, it has increased my feelings of freedom. My hopes, fears, and neuroses seem less personal and indelible. … Becoming sensitive to the background causes of one’s thoughts and feelings can paradoxically allow for greater creative control over one's life. This understanding reveals you to be a biochemical puppet, of course, but it also allows you to grab hold of one of your strings.”


The Second Gain: Emptiness toward Enlightenment

The second insight is the first applied to the broader world.

Everything in the universe is simply matter and energy following the laws of physics. There is no “good” or “bad.” Everything is empty of meaning, value, and emotional valence, except what our consciousness assigns to it

And with enough understanding, training, and reprogramming, we can “choose” not to assign anything to anything, except what makes our lives better.

It goes without saying: this is difficult. But the reality is that the rude cashier is just a collection of atoms constrained by the laws of physics. Ted Cruz is just following his genetic and societal programming. The chicken farmer, the person picking their toes on the train, the driver revving his unmuffled car – at the core, just collections of atoms, empty of any inherent meaning.

So instead of reacting with disdain, hatred, or mockery, we don’t have to react at all. Or we can “choose” to react with joy that we aren’t that person. Or we can “choose” compassion. Or we can “choose” to try to figure out actions that may help change a situation that is causing suffering in others – and we can make this choice without allowing ourselves to suffer. 

(And of course, when I say “choose,” I mean “use insights from others and our experiences to reprogram our neural net so we react differently in the future.”) 


Simply Another Way of Interacting with the World

We don’t start out knowing how to type, use a cellphone, or speak a language. We don’t simply “decide” to have those and other skills. But if something in our lives leads to the knowledge and training necessary, we can interact with the world in a new way. 

Learning a new language is perhaps the best example. People can speak German to me and I am unable to react in any positive, constructive way (unless they get a laugh from my idiotic grin). But because of an external factor (an excellent teacher in college) Anne “chose” to put in the time to learn and practice German, and now she has a new way of interacting with the world.

If you are reading this, it is likely that you have a similar ability – the ability to gain the knowledge and do the training necessary to achieve something closer to “enlightenment.” Put simply: 

By recognizing the illusion of free will and pursuing the right training / reprogramming, we can develop something much more like free will than we have now. We can take hold of one of the strings that currently makes our life worse than it needs to be. We can stop simply reacting and instead interact, with more control over our feelings.

In short: giving up free will and embracing emptiness can make life much better. 

Tuesday, January 21, 2025

Bonus repeat: Lincoln and Enlightenment (June 2023: Emptiness and Freedom, part 2 of 3)

Pre-script: Tonight is the 4th anniversary of the worst few seconds to ever happen to my family*. On the bright side, I have not been taken to the emergency room since that night - the longest ER-free stretch since I met Anne.

*I say family because the whole thing was really bad for both Anne and EK. 😢 

And also regarding terrible events: a reminder that I'm ignoring all political news. It remains hard, and I still miss Colbert. TY.



After receiving yesterday's blog, a friend asked, "What do you think it would take for you to have 'malice toward none and charity toward all?'" I half-jokingly sent this link as my flippant reply. But the below, which is part 2 of 3, is my actual answer. I'm working on it.


Part 1  |  Part 3 


In Why Buddhism Is True, Robert Wright quotes a teacher saying that you shouldn’t try to intellectually understand the Buddhist concept of emptiness, because if you make the attempt, your head would explode.

I disagree.


Recognizing Our Simplicity

We humans have proven ourselves capable of incredible illusions. From believing in god speaking to us and transubstantiation to suffering the delusion that we are living in the end times and the Dunning-Kruger effect, our brains do not see the world clearly. We can’t even comprehend how bad it is. (Doubt that?)

Although we can’t be sure we aren’t living in a simulation, all testable evidence indicates that the universe is simply matter and energy following (a certain set of) the laws of physics. (“A certain set of” because there could be other universes where the laws are different.)

We don’t understand how the chemical interactions of our brain’s ~1.4 x 10^26 atoms give rise to conscious, subjective experience. But we do know that we can manipulate consciousness in specific ways by manipulating the brain’s atoms' interactions. This gives every reason to believe that consciousness is an emergent property of specific arrangements of matter and energy, but still subject to the laws of physics (and the emergent rules of chemistry, biology, physiology). 

Everything we think, everything we feel, everything we do – all of it is, at the core, the interactions of atoms. Nothing more.

Recognizing this undermines the illusion of free will. But this insight isn’t (entirely) a loss, just as it isn’t (entirely) a loss to give up religion, or to understand the evolutionary basis of love, sex, and reproduction. Realizing the materialistreductionist nature of the universe is yet another gain – a clearer understanding of reality. And that better understanding can help us lead a better life.


The First Gain: Freedom (of a sort)

The first insight is into ourselves. Since everything is chemical reactions, we can’t be the driver of our thoughts and feelings. Consciousness is along for the ride. Our bodies feel emotions – hunger, fear, desire – as a way to understand the world and motivate “appropriate” behavior. Many things are going on in our body / brain to keep us alive; consciousness shines the spotlight of attention on one part of our otherwise unconscious thoughts and feelings to allow us to “think” more on that topic. We don’t “choose” what to think about.

This is the great insight from mindfulness meditation – recognizing that our minds don’t actually work the way we assume they do. Thoughts think themselves.

But we don’t have to be the feeling or the thought. Once we realize thoughts think themselves and feelings are messages, we don’t have to identify with them if we don’t want to. That is: these insights and mindfulness can reprogram our brains to recognize thoughts and feelings for what they are. Thoughts and feelings are not who we are.

More concretely: we don’t have to be “angry.” We don’t have to "be" anything.

Anger can arise, we can recognize it, and then “choose” to let it go. "I recognize I am experiencing anger" vs "I am angry."

Conversely, we can recognize good fortune, experience gratitude, and “choose” to embrace the experience of that feeling.

As Sam Harris notes:

“Losing a belief in free will has not made me a fatalist – in fact, it has increased my feelings of freedom. My hopes, fears, and neuroses seem less personal and indelible. … Becoming sensitive to the background causes of one’s thoughts and feelings can paradoxically allow for greater creative control over one's life. This understanding reveals you to be a biochemical puppet, of course, but it also allows you to grab hold of one of your strings.”


The Second Gain: Emptiness toward Enlightenment

The second insight is the first applied to the broader world.

Everything in the universe is simply matter and energy following the laws of physics. There is no “good” or “bad.” Everything is empty of meaning, value, and emotional valence, except what our consciousness assigns to it

And with enough understanding, training, and reprogramming, we can “choose” not to assign anything to anything, except what makes our lives better.

It goes without saying: this is difficult. But the reality is that the rude cashier is just a collection of atoms constrained by the laws of physics. Ted Cruz is just following his genetic and societal programming. The chicken farmer, the person picking their toes on the train, the driver revving his unmuffled car – at the core, just collections of atoms, empty of any inherent meaning.

So instead of reacting with disdain, hatred, or mockery, we don’t have to react at all. Or we can “choose” to react with joy that we aren’t that person. Or we can “choose” compassion. Or we can “choose” to try to figure out actions that may help change a situation that is causing suffering in others – and we can make this choice without allowing ourselves to suffer. 

(And of course, when I say “choose,” I mean “use insights from others and our experiences to reprogram our neural net so we react differently in the future.”) 


Simply Another Way of Interacting with the World

We don’t start out knowing how to type, use a cellphone, or speak a language. We don’t simply “decide” to have those and other skills. But if something in our lives leads to the knowledge and training necessary, we can interact with the world in a new way. 

Learning a new language is perhaps the best example. People can speak German to me and I am unable to react in any positive, constructive way (unless they get a laugh from my idiotic grin). But because of an external factor (an excellent teacher in college) Anne “chose” to put in the time to learn and practice German, and now she has a new way of interacting with the world.

If you are reading this, it is likely that you have a similar ability – the ability to gain the knowledge and do the training necessary to achieve something closer to “enlightenment.” Put simply: 

By recognizing the illusion of free will and pursuing the right training / reprogramming, we can develop something much more like free will than we have now. We can take hold of one of the strings that currently makes our life worse than it needs to be. We can stop simply reacting and instead interact, with more control over our feelings.

In short: giving up free will and embracing emptiness can make life much better. 

Monday, June 18, 2018

The Self as Illusion

I was listening to an older Sam Harris podcast while cooking this weekend, and he revisited his contention that "the self is an illusion." One of the others on stage pushed back, and Sam countered by stating he had experienced the dissolution of the self. The counter to that was that many people had "experienced god," which I thought was a pretty solid takedown.

But in other contexts, Sam has done what I consider to be a good job of explaining what he means. As I interpret it, there are two parts.

First, there is no free will (which is discussed in his book of the same name). This fact is logically obvious when I think about it - everything is just physical reactions, so where could "free will" actually enter the picture?

Although I understand and accept this fact at a rational level, I haven't fully embraced it. While I think I am relatively Zen about many things in life ("It is what it is"), my default reaction to events is not always, "They could not have done otherwise." For example, I still loathe Paul Ryan. Also, I still wish for vengeance against a certain person who harmed me and my family.

Yes, I know that this is neither rational nor helpful. But I could not feel otherwise!   😉

Following from that is the logical conclusion that there is no thinker of thoughts. Even though we are conscious and self-aware, there is no "self" in control of our mind.

One doesn't have to be a materialist to recognize that this is true. It is possible to observe this fact through meditation. If we can pay close enough attention, we see that thoughts just arise. To slightly modify an exchange between Dan Harris and Sam Harris:

Dan: "But can't I choose to say, 'Now I'm going to think about a Tofurky sandwich'?"

Sam: "Where did 'Tofurky sandwich' come from?"

Dan: "Um, my hunger after two hours talking with you?"

There are obviously some difficult implications that flow from these insights. For example: If we have no free will, how can we change anything about ourselves? But that's like asking how a computer could change, given that it has no free will. Computers just need a new program (or, in a bad case, a virus) to be different. We, too, can also get new programs. We can read new books, listen to thoughtful podcasts, subscribe to a rarely-published but interesting blog. Each of those inputs can change the way our brains function.

Click for larger.
And if we could really, really internalize that everyone around us is just a relatively broken computer, we would have a lot less frustration and upset. We can still want to reduce suffering in the world, but we would reduce our own suffering first. Good luck to each of us!

Tuesday, January 9, 2024

Top Posts of 2023, #5 (tie): Your Brain Isn't What You Think It Is

Mary Chapin Carpenter - "The Bug"  

Warning: simulated bug death.

A very rare snow coat on Wassen Peak in the Tucson Mountains. 

Sometimes I'll hear from people who are convinced we can't be living in a simulation. Much more often, people will insist that they have free will - that they are in control of their mind.

I am sympathetic to these views! Especially free will - it absolutely does feel like I am the author of my conscious narrative. 

Even if you don't buy the reductionist argument in Losing My Religions, a rigorous mindful practice will put the lie to our feeling of control, of authorship. Paying very close attention reveals that thoughts think themselves.

There is another way to see that we aren't necessarily in a non-simulated reality as well as showing us that there is no one in control:

Dreams.

When you wake up from a dream, spend some time analyzing it. If you're like me, many of your dreams are just bizarre.* But our consciousness just accepts the insanity as reality.

Doo-dee-doo-dee-dooo.

And in the dream, we just go along with whatever is served up to us (unless we've mastered lucid dreaming; I've only been able to do that a handful of times). Our consciousness just floats along within whatever absurdist play our mind puts together from random memories being moved around.

(If you still doubt, try doing some psychedelics and then just try to "free will" your way back to normalcy during the trip.)

This doesn't diminish your importance. You have the ability to have subjective experience, which, when you really think about it, seems pretty darn miraculous. To paraphrase Carl Sagan, we should revel in knowing we are a way for the universe to be aware of itself. 

*Latest dream: I was in high school (was in high school 40 years ago). I was not married (I've been married for the majority of my life). I was in class with someone I only knew in college and haven't seen in decades. The FBI had undercover agents there. I was really angry about, and kept harping on, something that just wouldn't bother me in "waking" life.

Monday, March 6, 2023

Mindful Monday: Your Brain Isn't What You Think It Is

Mary Chapin Carpenter - "The Bug"  
Warning: simulated bug death.

A very rare snow coat on Wassen Peak in the Tucson Mountains. 

Sometimes I'll hear from people who are convinced we can't be living in a simulation. Much more often, people will insist that they have free will - that they are in control of their mind.

I am sympathetic to these views! Especially free will - it absolutely does feel like I am the author of my conscious narrative. 

Even if you don't buy the reductionist argument in Losing My Religions, a rigorous mindful practice will put the lie to our feeling of control, of authorship. Paying very close attention reveals that thoughts think themselves.

There is another way to see that we aren't necessarily in a non-simulated reality as well as showing us that there is no one in control:

Dreams.

When you wake up from a dream, spend some time analyzing it. If you're like me, many of your dreams are just bizarre.* But our consciousness just accepts the insanity as reality.

Doo-dee-doo-dee-dooo.

And in the dream, we just go along with whatever is served up to us (unless we've mastered lucid dreaming; I've only been able to do that a handful of times). Our consciousness just floats along within whatever absurdist play our mind puts together from random memories being moved around.

(If you still doubt, try doing some psychedelics and then just try to "free will" your way back to normalcy during the trip.)

This doesn't diminish your importance. You have the ability to have subjective experience, which, when you really think about it, seems pretty darn miraculous. To paraphrase Carl Sagan, we should revel in knowing we are a way for the universe to be aware of itself. 

*Latest dream: I was in high school (was in high school 40 years ago). I was not married (I've been married for the majority of my life). I was in class with someone I only knew in college and haven't seen in decades. The FBI had undercover agents there. I was really angry about, and kept harping on, something that just wouldn't bother me in "waking" life.

Wednesday, June 18, 2014

One Possible Future

A Roadmap to Animal Liberation
Originally published in 2006

With cruelty rampant on factory farms, and vegetarians currently a small minority, it is easy to dismiss the hope for a vegetarian world as naïve. “My Uncle Dick hunts, and my cousin Jeb is always mocking me for being vegan. You’re crazy if you think they will ever change!”

These are legitimate concerns. However, it is nevertheless possible to achieve our goals – and much more quickly than we imagine.

Taking a longer perspective can help guide our advocacy. Society has advanced an incredible amount in just the last few centuries. Even though democracy was first proposed in ancient Greece, only during the eighteenth century did humanity see the hints of a democratic system. Only recently was slavery abolished in the industrialized world. Not until the last hundred years was child labor ended in Europe and North America, child abuse criminalized, women allowed to vote. Some minorities have attained more equal rights only in the last few decades.

It is hard to comprehend just how much society has changed in recent history. Prejudices we can hardly fathom today were completely accepted just decades ago. For example, if we read what was written and said about slavery – fewer than 150 years ago – the defenders were not just ignorant racists, but admired politicians, civic and religious leaders, and learned intellectuals. What is horrifying to us now was once not only accepted, but respected.

However slow our progress may feel, we are advancing at lightning speed compared to past social justice movements. A century ago, almost no animals received any protection whatsoever from abuse. Now, according to a 2003 Gallup poll, ninety-six percent of Americans want to see animals protected from abuse, sixty-two percent want strict laws regulating the treatment of farmed animals, and fully one-fourth believe that animals deserve “the exact same rights as people to be free from harm and exploitation.” Until 1990, there was one ballot initiative to protect animals that had passed at a state level – just one! Since 1990, animal advocates have passed more than twenty, including several directly abolishing some of the worst abuses on factory farms.

Today the vast majority of people oppose cruelty to animals, and many question eating animals, at least on some level. [2011 update: Grist’s Tom Laskawy reviewed a survey from agribusiness front group Center for Food Integrity: “The study’s analysis notes that 51 percent strongly agree that they have ‘no problem’ eating meat and dairy. It’s still a majority, but the number is down a full 12 percent since 2007. The trend suggests that by 2012, less than a majority of consumers will strongly agree that eating animals or animal products is okay. Are Americans getting ready to let their vegan flag fly?” “Consumers losing faith in Big Food,” Nov. 4, 2011.]

Thus, the discussion now must focus on helping people see that eating meat violates their own principles. This effort is only just beginning. Twenty years ago, most animal advocacy in the U.S. was focused on fur and vivisection, nearly ignoring the roughly ninety-nine percent of animals butchered for food. Only recently have more groups and individuals focused on this ninety-nine percent by exposing the cruelty of factory farms and promoting vegetarianism.

In large part because of this shift in advocacy, factory farms – which most people knew nothing about ten or twenty years ago – are now considered ethical abominations to many. As Bruce Friedrich and I acknowledge in The Animal Activist’s Handbook:

Twenty years ago, few people had heard the word “vegan.” Finding mock meats and soymilk was nearly impossible. According to market research by Mintel, “Until the mid-1990s, change was slow in coming to the world of vegetarian foods, and many average consumers relegated ‘vegetarian products’ to a counter-cultural movement, not a mainstream trend.”

Today, even cousin Jeb doesn’t need “vegan” explained to him. You can find veggie burgers, soymilk, and various other vegetarian convenience foods in most grocery stores. As Bruce and I add: “According to Mintel, ‘In 2003, the vegetarian foods market in the US topped $1.6 billion in sales. This represents a constant-price growth rate of 111.3% since 1998.’ Mintel estimates that the market was up to $2.8 billion in 2006.”

Forbes reports: “[M]arket research shows that the number of consumers who lean toward some sort of vegetarianism is increasing across all age groups. The Vegetarian Resource Group estimates that 2.8% of adult Americans consider themselves vegetarian, up from 2.3% in a 2000 survey. Another 6% to 10% of the population said it was ‘almost vegetarian’ and another 20% to 25% are ‘vegetarian inclined,’ or intentionally reducing meat in their diet, according to VRG.” According to Food Systems Insider: “Ten percent of 25- to 34-year-olds say they never eat meat.”

[2014 update: “"Indeed, the meat-free market is growing, with about 7% of population now calling themselves vegetarian or vegan, according to a recent Gallup poll. And yet, 43% of the population eats vegetarian meals at least once a week.” “Honey, let’s have vegan tonight.”]

As we continue our efforts, more vegetarian products arrive on the market every month. Having convenient vegetarian options available is vital, as it makes it easier for new people to try and, more importantly, to stick with a compassionate diet. As more people sample vegetarian meats and other vegetarian products, competition will continue to increase the supply and variety, improving quality and driving down prices. This cycle of growing numbers of vegetarians and the increasing convenience of vegetarian eating is self-reinforcing. Essentially, the technology of vegetarian meats and other foods is both driven by and a driver of moral progress.

If we continue to expand our advocacy, the growth of vegetarianism will accelerate to a tipping point, where opposition to factory farms and the adoption of vegetarianism become the “norms” among influential groups. Legislation, as it usually does, will continue to follow these evolving norms, and we’ll see more of animal agriculture’s worst practices outlawed and abolished – something that has already begun. Corporate practices will also continue to adjust to the demands of an increasingly aware market.

At the same time, powerful economic forces will kick in because meat is ultimately inefficient. It is more efficient to eat plant foods directly, rather than feeding plant foods to animals and then eating some of the animals’ flesh. Of course, people aren’t going to substitute tofu for meat, but that is not the choice they’ll be making. Food science has advanced such that the best vegetarian meats are able to satisfy even hardcore carnivores. Deli slices from Tofurky, burgers from Boca, Gimme Lean sausage and ground beef, Morningstar MealStarters, Gardenburger’s Riblets and Chik’n – all of these dismiss the notion that giving up meat is necessarily a deprivation.


The faster the growth in the number of people eating vegetarian, the faster vegetarian meats will improve in taste, become cheaper, and be found in far more places. (Compare a 2006 Boca Burger to a 1986 Nature Burger, and imagine how good a 2026 veggie burger will be!) In addition, in vitro meats become more viable each year. In meatro can also be more efficient than actual animal corpses, and can be engineered to have the same benefits as vegetarian meats: no cholesterol, good fats (omega-3s), no factory farms, no slaughterhouses, no manure ponds, no greenhouse-gas emissions, no food poisoning, no mad cow, no avian flu. These technologies will also be accelerated by the growth of vegetarianism.


Our challenge now is to expand the vegetarian market by explaining to more meat eaters the reasons for choosing vegetarian meals, while exposing them to new – though similar – products. The more rapidly we do this, the sooner cruelty-free eating will be widespread.
After his first heart attack, Uncle Dick will shift over to vegetarian meats that have no cholesterol or saturated or trans fats and are high in omega-3s. Cousin Jeb’s second wife – a vegetarian since being handed an Even If You Like Meat booklet at college in 2003 – will use that as an excuse to only cook vegetarian meals, and Jeb will hardly notice the difference! Their daughter Barbara will grow up a vegan activist and will oversee McDonald’s shift to non-animal chicken in their sandwiches.

Despite the current horror and continued suffering, if we take the long view and are willing to commit to the work that needs to be done, we should be deeply optimistic. Animal liberation can be the future. With our efforts, it could be achieved with a whimper, not a bang. Change comes not by revolution, but through person-by-person outreach progressing hand in hand with advances in technology, leading slowly but inexorably to a new norm that, to most people, hardly seems different. But an unfathomable amount of suffering will be prevented.

It is up to us to make this happen.


Monday, July 6, 2026

Silly Song & Suicide

For people who know the excellent Nirvana song "Smells Like Teen Spirit," this Weird Al version is just too funny.  

"Humans!" <eyeroll>


Almost forty years ago, I wrote an editorial saying that one way (some) non-human animals have it better than us was that we (generally) don't let our cats and dogs suffer horribly at the end of their lives. 

Losing covers it succinctly:

Opposition to physician-assisted suicide is immoral.

Why oh why do we think we can tell anyone that they can’t end their life in as painless a way possible? Who do we think we are? We let “any butt-reaming asshole” bring any number of new lives into existence, regardless of circumstance, regardless of how much the child will suffer. Yet we deny those same people the right to end their own life? Crazy....


This recent Freakonomics episode on the topic
is pretty good. Anne and I note that the failed priest's "other side" anti-medical-aid-in-dying argument is: "It is wrong to want to end your life because you don't want to lose control. [Because I decree it!] Therefore, I should control your life."

He also goes on and on about "free will," all while insisting that people shouldn't be allowed to make choices about their lives!

(Ad hominin but still: he took a vow before God to serve God. Then met a woman and said, "Just kidding!" And now he wants to dictate how others can live, insisting, "I will be vindicated." 

He's not saying that his arguments will prove superior, or that society will do more than pay lip service to "human dignity." No - he insists that he, personally, will be vindicated.

God save us from moral fanatics.)

Wednesday, February 4, 2026

Q on Hard Determinism, My Least Popular View

Winter in the desert.

As you know, I've written a lot about our lack of free will. I don't do this to say, "Look how insightful I am! I'm just so much smarter than the rubes." 

No, I write about free will because if we recognize reality, we can be much happier (full version) and also more effective at reducing suffering. Win/win!

Here is Q (ChatGPT) on why hard determinism is so rare and unpopular (full interaction):

Me: Most of our friends are atheists and/or vegan. But very few of them are hard determinists. It makes me think there are more vegans than hard determinists.

Q: I think your intuition is almost certainly right — and by a large margin.

Short version

In the U.S., there are many more vegans than non-compatibilist hard determinists. Likely an order of magnitude more.

Rough numbers (U.S.)

Vegans

Most credible estimates put U.S. vegans at roughly:

1–3% of adults (depending on definition and year) [1% at best]

Even if we take the low end (true, stable, ethical vegans), you’re still talking millions of people.

Hard (non-compatibilist) determinists

As we discussed:

  • Starting with ~1–2% at most
  • Possibly <1% if you require [which I do]:
    • rejection of compatibilism after it’s explained
    • stable endorsement
    • acceptance of moral implications (no just deserts, no ultimate blame)

That’s plausibly hundreds of thousands, not millions.

So yes: Vegans almost certainly outnumber hard determinists — probably by 5×–10×, maybe more.

Why this makes sense psychologically

Veganism asks you to give up:

  • Taste pleasure
  • Social convenience
  • Cultural norms

But it preserves:

  • Moral agency
  • Praise/blame
  • “I chose the right thing”
  • A heroic self-narrative [natch]

In fact, veganism often strengthens moral identity

Hard determinism asks you to give up:

That’s a much more fundamental sacrifice.

As you’ve noticed, many people are happy to say:

  • “Animals shouldn’t suffer”
  • “God doesn’t exist”

But they recoil at:

  • “No one could have done otherwise — including me”

Your social circle is actually a perfect test case

Your friends already:

  • Question tradition
  • Reject religious authority
  • Make ethically demanding lifestyle choices
  • Accept unpopular views (veganism!)

And still, very few accept hard determinism.

That strongly suggests the bottleneck isn’t intelligence or courage — it’s the psychological cost.

One way to put it (very “you”)

  • Veganism challenges what we owe others.
  • Hard determinism challenges what we are.

Most people will go much farther on the first than the second.

Monday, September 18, 2023

Quotes

Everclear - I Will Buy You a New Life

Not a wonderful song, but this is great:

I hate those people who love to tell you
"Money is the root of all that kills"
They have never been poor
They have never had the joy of
A welfare Christmas

One of the telescopes of The Very Large Array.


What humans may have lacked in physical attractiveness, they made up for in gullibility. You could tell them anything in a convincing enough voice and they would believe it. 

Anything, of course, except the truth.

-The Humans, Matt Haig (a good book)



As with astronomy, the difficulty of recognizing the motion of the earth lay in abandoning the immediate sensation of the earth’s fixity and of the motion of the planets. So in history, the difficulty of recognizing the subjection of personality to the laws of space, time, and cause lies in renouncing the direct feeling of the independence of one’s own personality. 

But as in astronomy, the new view said: “It is true that we do not feel the movement of the earth, but by admitting its immobility we arrive at absurdity, while by admitting its motion (which we do not feel) we arrive at laws.” So also in history, the new view says: “It is true that we are not conscious of our dependence, but by admitting our free will we arrive at absurdity, while by admitting our dependence on the external world, on time, and on cause, we arrive at laws.” 

In the first case, it was necessary to renounce the consciousness of an unreal immobility in space and to recognize a motion we did not feel; in the present case, it is similarly necessary to renounce a freedom that does not exist [free will] and to recognize a dependence of which we are not conscious.

-Babylon's Ashes (book six of The Expanse; the TV adaptation is really interesting - just some very fascinating choices)