Free Will: Does It Exist?

Summary

Science Vs – “Free Will: Does It Exist?” (July 30, 2026)

Episode Overview

In this thought-provoking episode, host Wendy Zuckerman and producer Meryl Horne, Ph.D., explore the age-old debate about free will: do we really choose our actions, or is it all predetermined? With input from neuroscientists and physicists—including a key conversation with theoretical physicist Sean Carroll—they dive into landmark experiments, critique the interpretation of scientific findings, and consider whether neuroscience actually threatens our sense of agency. The episode is playful, skeptical, and scientific, asking how much control we truly have over our destinies and what it means for responsibility and society.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Free Will in the Internet Age (00:00–03:22)

• Pop-culture vs. Philosophy: The hosts reference viral memes and social media trends treating free will with irreverence—mixing cutlery haphazardly, climbing into attics to eat chips—juxtaposed against deep philosophical roots and "pockets of the internet" that argue free will is entirely illusory (00:00).
• Framing the Question: Wendy asks, “What if that freedom isn’t real?” setting up the episode to interrogate both the “illusion” and any scientific evidence (00:40).

2. Why the Debate Matters (04:17–05:24)

• Psychological Impacts: Reading material that claims free will is false has measurable negative effects—people become more likely to cheat, less helpful, more aggressive ([04:48] F: “These studies find that people will act worse…after reading stuff like this.”).
• Clarification: Free will’s definition centers on “genuine choice”—making a deliberate decision among real options ([05:39] F: “If I have free will, it means that I am the one deciding…”).

3. Physics, Biology, and Determinism (06:12–07:48)

• “Clockwork Universe” Analogy: As physics advanced, a deterministic view emerged—just as gravity determines a ball’s motion, the molecules in our bodies could theoretically predict our choices ([06:19] A, [07:10] F).
• Neuroscientific view: Our bodies are made of molecules like everything else. Is consciousness just the result of predetermined interactions?

4. Benjamin Libet’s Landmark Experiment (08:31–11:04)

• Setup: Participants signal when they feel the urge to move their wrist while their brain activity is recorded ([09:33] C: “You see your hands, and what I want you to do is sometime when you feel…flex your wrist…”).
• Key Finding: Electrical activity (“readiness potential”) appears in the brain before participants report making a conscious choice ([11:04] C: “What he found was that this brain signal happened even before people made up their mind…”).

5. Criticisms and Replications (12:25–15:39)

• Shortcomings: Nearly half a second precedes the conscious report—not proven to be meaningful, as Wendy points out ([11:48] A: “That could be the time that you…decide…then you look up at the clock.”).
• Modern Approach: John Dylan Haynes uses fMRI and machine learning, finding brain activity up to seven seconds before participants thought they chose a button ([13:03–13:40]).
• Memorable Moment: Wendy’s on-air “animal sound” for seven seconds to illustrate the surprising timescale ([13:46] A: “So I will make a sound…That was all. So that time, but in reverse…”).

6. Predictability of Choices (15:39–17:26)

• Machine Learning Results: Haynes’ algorithm predicted left vs. right button presses with about 60% accuracy ([16:21] F: “So it was about 60% accurate.”). Later studies pushed this above 80% ([16:59] F, [17:03] A).
• Interpretation: These are well above random chance, but not close to full determinism.

Notable Quote
[16:39] A: “It’s a fart above random chance, right?”

7. Are These Experiments Sufficient? (17:38–18:55)

• Limits of Evidence: The studies are influential (Haynes cited ~3,000 times), but they’re “press a button, don’t press a button”—far from complex life decisions ([28:03] A: “And there is a long way from that to, should I have children? Should I marry this person?”).
• Philosophical Split: Some take the data as a death blow to free will; others—including many scientists—remain unconvinced this is what the data really shows ([18:23] F).

8. The Case for Emergent Free Will (22:41–27:43)

• Sean Carroll’s Emergence Argument:
  • Just as temperature or ocean waves don’t exist at the level of single atoms or molecules, free will may be a “macroscopic” (emergent) property of brains as systems ([23:54] B: “There are multiple ways of talking about the universe…the emergent macroscopic, higher-level theory…”).
  • The conscious “self” and its decisions can be real and meaningful, even if every neuron follows physics and chemistry.
• Analogy: You can’t see “the ocean” or “currents” by zooming in to one water molecule—these things “emerge” at a higher scale ([24:15] F).

Notable Quote
[25:10] B (Sean Carroll): “The you that is making that decision is a sort of collective emergent phenomenon…”

9. Open Questions and Critique (27:43–30:15)

• Hard Problem of Emergence: Science doesn’t yet show how choices about “which ice cream flavor” (or bigger life choices) emerge from neural activity, but Carroll and others are optimistic it’s a matter of time ([27:55] B; [28:03] F).
• Lab Decisions vs. Real Life: There’s a disconnect between simple research tasks and meaningful human decisions ([28:50] F).
• Responsibility: Even if brain processes initiate “behind the scenes,” our sense of agency (and societal responsibility) remains practical.

Notable Quote
[29:24] F: “No matter what is happening in the brain, we still have the experience of making choices freely. So to just kind of pretend we don’t is BS.”

• Misinterpretation Warning: Even John Dylan Haynes emphasizes his famous study never claimed to fully disprove free will ([29:50–30:12] C: “We were quite careful also, by the way, not to say in that 2008 paper that there’s no free will…”).

10. How Should We Think of Ourselves? (30:38–31:02)

• Even unconscious brain activity is “us”—free will might involve expanding our concept of self to include unconscious processes.
• Philosophers and scientists agree: hard science about readiness potential doesn’t close the book on free will.

---

Notable Quotes

• [04:48] F (Meryl Horne): “These studies find that people will act worse. They’re more likely to cheat, less likely to help other people, and more likely to be aggressive after reading stuff like this.”
• [11:04] C (John Dylan Haynes): “What he found was that this brain signal happened even before people made up their mind. And that’s the paradox.”
• [16:39] A (Wendy): “It’s a fart above random chance, right?”
• [25:10] B (Sean Carroll): “The you that is making that decision is a sort of collective emergent phenomenon…”
• [29:24] F (Meryl): “No matter what is happening in the brain, we still have the experience of making choices freely. So to just kind of pretend we don’t is BS.”
• [29:50] C (Haynes): “We were quite careful also, by the way, not to say in that 2008 paper that there’s no free will…so that we could publish the findings independent of the philosophical implications of the study.”

---

Key Timestamps

• 00:00–03:22 — Introduction, stakes, and viral culture of free will.
• 04:17–05:24 — Why beliefs about free will affect behavior.
• 08:31–11:04 — Libet’s experiment and the “readiness potential.”
• 13:03–13:40 — Haynes’ fMRI replication, 7-second “head start.”
• 16:08–17:26 — Mind-reading algorithms: 60%–80% prediction accuracy.
• 22:41–27:43 — Emergence theory with Sean Carroll: ocean and weather analogies.
• 28:03–28:50 — Lab choices vs. real-life decisions; prudence in interpretation.
• 29:50–30:12 — Haynes on the intention behind his famous paper.

---

Takeaways

• Neuroscience reveals unconscious brain activity precedes conscious choice, but this doesn’t amount to a full-scale debunking of free will.
• Many scientists posit that free will is an emergent property—real and meaningful at the scale of minds, not mere molecules.
• Responsibility and agency, so central to society, shouldn’t be discarded just because we don’t understand all neural processes.
• Scientific humility is warranted: we’ve only begun exploring the brain’s complexity, and simple lab-based “choices” are a far cry from life’s biggest decisions.

Final words:
[30:38] F: “Maybe we do just need to expand that idea of what we are...There are tons of things that our brains are doing behind the scenes that we’re not aware of. And that’s all part of who we are.”

---

Recommended further listening: Sean Carroll’s “Mindscape” podcast for a deeper dive into free will.
Full episode citations and a transcript available in the show notes.

Transcript

[A]

Hi, I'm Wendy Zuckerman, and this is Science Versus the show that pits facts against free will. Today on the show, does free will exist or is it just an illusion? It's a debate that scientists and philosophers have been having for a very long time. But now the Internet has entered the ring. There's a meme that's been going around social media, and in these videos you'll see people saying, I just remembered I have free will. And then they do whatever the hell they want. In one, there's a guy who dumps all his silverware out into a drawer and mixes it up. He doesn't even sort the spoons from the forks. In another video, you'll see a man eating potato chips and then climbing a ladder to his attic where he sits on a stool and continues eating potato chips. But then he'll blink like a goat. So on the one hand, you have this celebration of our freedom, our free will, our ability to control our destinies and eat potato chips and bleat like whoever we want. But what if that freedom isn't real? There are pockets of the Internet telling us that basically everything has been destined before you even think of picking up a fork.

[B]

I think free will is an incoherent idea. We know that it doesn't exist, and we know that what people think they have is an illusion.

[C]

I don't think we have a shred of free will.

[A]

If this sounds mad, it's not. Going back decades, scientists have been publishing papers showing that free will might not exist. So are we kidding ourselves if we think we're freely making decisions? That I'm the one deciding to tell you the science instead of going macaque or bleed. Anyway, I did that. I made the choice to do two animal sounds. Or did I? Today we find out because when it comes to free will, you may think you have the power to decide to. But then there's science. Science versus free will is coming up just after the break.

[D]

This episode is brought to you by Adobe Firefly. The all in one creative studio with AI powered image and video generation built for today's creative process, Firefly helps you generate, edit and experiment fast because the asks aren't getting smaller and the timelines.

[C]

Woo.

[D]

Yeah, still tight. With all the best creative AI models in one place, Firefly brings your ideas to life. Learn [e-mail] Firefly this episode is brought

[E]

to you by ADT. One second you're enjoying your day, off, the next, your phone buzzes. A window's been broken at home. You're miles away. And second, everything can change. That's why ADT Security Systems can monitor your home 24 7. They're backed by the most company operated monitoring centers in the industry. So you're always supported during an emergency. When every second Counts, count on ADT. Visit ADT.com to learn more.

[A]

Welcome back. Today on the show, Free will. Does it exist? Meryl Horne, Ph.D. is gonna tell us all about it.

[F]

Hi, Wendy.

[A]

Hey, Meryl.

[F]

Yeah, we're gonna crack this whole free will thing.

[A]

That's great.

[F]

Well, do you, do you think we have free will, Wendy?

[A]

From what I know, I think it probably is an illusion, but it's such a good illusion that I don't know how we move on from that. Obviously I think I have free will. I think I make choices. So how do you get behind that mirror?

[F]

I mean, that's what the science is helpful for, right? You don't have to just listen to us philosophize about, do we? Do we? Let's look at the science.

[A]

Exactly. So where do we begin? Can we get behind the mirror or is it just philosophizing?

[F]

I think we can. I think the science will actually help us see. Yeah, what's going on kind of behind the scenes. But first to just kind of set the stakes. You know, this might all feel like some silly little thought experiments, but the answer here does actually seem to matter. So, like, there have been some psychology experiments that get people to read something crapping on free will. Like something that says, quote, science has demonstrated that free will is an illusion, unquote.

[D]

Okay.

[F]

And then the scientists see if reading that thing changes people's behavior. And these studies find that people will act worse. They're more likely to cheat, less likely to help other people, and more likely to be aggressive after reading stuff like this.

[A]

Wow. Which makes absolute sense if you tell me by the end of this episode, I don't have free will.

[F]

I mean, you're just gonna be an I don't have a choice.

[A]

Is that the idea?

[F]

Is that the idea?

[A]

What is, what is free will? I guess that is that it? That I just do not have a choice. Everything is predestined.

[F]

Well, yeah, let's take a step back maybe and like get some terms straight. I don't think it means you will be an asshole. Okay, but we could, like, let's look

[A]

at any more than you already are. Okay,

[F]

so yeah, here's one handy definition that's used by some scientists. Okay, so, okay, first there needs to be a choice involved. So you're at the ice cream shop trying to decide between the chocolate and the caramel.

[A]

Right.

[F]

Which for me is a tough one.

[A]

Chocolate, obviously. What?

[F]

Caramel's pretty good. But if I have free will, it means that I am the one deciding. Like, it's not a random choice either. The idea is that I have the freedom to really pick between these two different flavors.

[A]

Yes.

[F]

Yeah. So sound good? That's basically our definition.

[A]

Oh, okay. Yeah. But there is a world where you're not actually making that choice.

[F]

Yes. So that's the big question. Like, is that feeling of having a choice real or not? Because for centuries, there have been challenges to this idea. So basically, as soon as we started discovering the laws of physics, you know, the fact that we have gravity and all these forces that can explain why things do what they do, we've gotten this picture of the world that's like clockwork. You know, the reason something happens is because something right beforehand made that happen. And you could also kind of predict what's going to happen next by looking at these forces. And you can explain, like, why things do what they do.

[A]

Right. If you put a ball down a hill, thanks to gravity, you know, it's gonna roll down. That's a long bow from. I don't pick my ice cream flavors.

[F]

Yeah, well, so there is a lot of dots to be connected there. But our bodies, you know, your body choosing that ice cream flavor is just made of a bunch of molecules were made as the same stuff as that ball. And so in theory, couldn't we predict, like, what our bodies are gonna do next just by looking at the. Those molecules and then, like, applying the laws of physics, biology, neuroscience, whatever. I talked about this with John Dylan Haynes. He's a professor at a neuroscience center in Charite, a medical school in Berlin. And he had a sort of visualization for how to imagine this in this, like clockwork.

[A]

Okay.

[C]

You're kind of like in this on this rail, like a carriage or a train, and you're in this on these tracks, and there's no way of escaping the laws of nature. You kind of constrained to the path that the world is going to go.

[F]

So going back to that ice cream decision, you know, ideally you'd be able to see, like, what's going on in my brain as I'm trying to make this choice and see, like, can. Can someone just looking at my brain sort of figure out what I'm going to choose in advance? So John told me about this experiment that kind of changed everything. So it's the 1980s, and there is One scientist and neurophysiologist who ends up doing this pretty famous experiment.

[C]

Yeah. So the person who started this whole thing off was Benjamin Libet.

[F]

So this guy, Benjamin Libet, he wants to kind of see what's happening in our brains as we're making just one stupid little decision.

[A]

Okay. And the idea is that you would see the patterns of neurons firing or whatnot, and that they would have fired as if to, say, chocolate flavor. But you only consciously decide chocolate after those neurons have fired. Is that what we're looking for in the brain?

[F]

That's the idea, yeah. Like, what's the order of events here? Can you see any signs of chocolate neurons firing before people are like, I made my decision to get the chocolate ice cream. That's basically what he's gonna do.

[A]

Okay, interesting.

[F]

Instead of bringing people into an ice cream shop, he does something much more basic. So imagine if you're in this experiment, he has you come into the lab, you sit down in a chair, and he gives you these instructions.

[C]

You see your hands, and what I want you to do is sometime when you feel spontaneously the urge to flex your wrist. Please do that.

[F]

And then you flap your hand, like, just up and down.

[C]

Exactly. Exactly.

[F]

Like a wave.

[A]

Okay, A wave. A wave with your whole hand. Got it. Okay. So whenever you feel the urge.

[F]

Yep. Flapping hands. But meanwhile, he wants a way to track exactly when you made your decision. So he puts this thing on the

[C]

wall like a clock, just with one single point, like a simple clock.

[F]

Okay.

[C]

And I asked people to remember where the point was when they made the decision to move.

[F]

Now I'm gonna flex. I'm gonna do it.

[C]

I'm gonna do it now. And you flex it.

[F]

And then later the person would say, like, yeah, I made my decision to flex my wrist when the point on the clock thing. Three o' clock position.

[A]

Yes.

[F]

And then meanwhile, Libet's got this EEG going on, so electrodes on the person's scalp that can measure electrical activity of the brain.

[D]

Okay.

[F]

And then he can also see when they flex their wrists because he has something else that, like, reads out muscle activity. So now he has the time people say they made this decision, and then he has the time they actually flex their wrists. And he has those brain signals throughout this whole time. So now we're kind of ready to see, like, what is going on, like, if we are the ones calling the shots. If I have the power to flex my wrist now, you'd expect to see a certain pattern of events. First, you make that decision to flex

[C]

you're in control and then the brain comes later. And that was kind of what he was expecting. What he found was that this brain signal happened even before people made up their mind. And that's the paradox.

[A]

So that he would see activity in the brain, then people would think, I'll flap my wrist now.

[F]

Yeah, yeah, he saws. He sees a little like, blippity blip in the brain before people say they decided to flex their wrists.

[A]

It's not that convincing, though, because, I mean, what was. He found it was like a couple of seconds difference. Maybe people just didn't look at the clock properly. Right.

[F]

It was even less than. Yeah, it was half a second, Half a second different.

[A]

Yeah. That could be the time that you. You consciously decide to flip your wrists and then you look up at the clock. Right. I don't think my free will doesn't exist thanks to this study.

[F]

Yeah, no, lots of people had criticisms like this. Right, right. And so, you know, this old experiment from the 80s wasn't like the last word on the question of free will of. John actually decided to do a more modern take on this experiment using, you know, newer equipment. So, yeah, now it's the early aughts, 25 years later, and he does FMRI.

[A]

Yes, this is what we need. Yes.

[F]

So now you can get a more detailed picture of, like, what brain activity is happening where. And they can use these fancy computer programs to analyze all that data.

[A]

Oh, this is excellent. Yes, yes, yes.

[F]

Okay, so John and his team bring in a bunch of volunteers, 14 of them.

[C]

So what they were told to do was to spontaneously, at some point they could decide on themselves to decide between a left or right button and then to immediately press the button.

[F]

So left button or right button whenever they feel like it, and then John,

[A]

whenever they make the choice.

[F]

And then John's. Meanwhile, John is getting all this data from the scanner and then he looks at the results with his student, and it turns out that they did replicate that old experiment from the 80s. It held up and they found something even more extreme. So he sees a brain signal that was happening even earlier, whereas before it was a half a second difference between when they started to see the blip and when people said they made the decision. Now, John could see a signal seven seconds before people said they made the decision. Yeah, seven seconds.

[A]

Let's just count that. Okay, yeah, let's, let's. Let's demonstrate what seven seconds is. Okay.

[F]

Okay.

[A]

So I will make a sound like a. I do a better chicken than goat, so.

[F]

Oh, sure.

[A]

Okay. Do you want to set the timer? Okay, okay, okay, okay, okay. So I feel like I'm making the choice between goat and chicken and to make an animal sound at all. So

[F]

time restarted. That was seven seconds.

[A]

That was all. So that time, but in reverse, my brain had possibly already made the choice to go bagha.

[F]

Yeah, yeah. Something in your brain was like, oh, yeah, I'm gonna start setting the stage, I guess, for me to make this noise in seven freaking seconds. John was surprised when he saw this.

[C]

He was like, we really have to make sure this is correct. So we went and did all sorts of controls.

[F]

He saw that it was real. He saw the signal seven seconds out before people said that they made the decision.

[C]

So there's something deep in your unconscious that seems to be preparing. It's already almost as if the brain made up its mind, but you don't know about it yet.

[F]

For me, it does kind of take care of the criticism we were talking about, where it's like, oh, maybe people are just a little bit bad at reporting exactly when they made the decision, because in seven seconds, that was a long time. They're not going to be that late.

[A]

So does John know what the blip means? Like, what is happening in the brain when the brain is making the choice?

[F]

Yeah. What does this blip mean? Is it your brain actually deciding, should I move the left finger or the right finger ahead of time? Or is that signal just kind of like foreplay? Like parts of your brain kind of gearing up, getting ready to make this decision that doesn't actually happen until later? Like, what is going on in the blip?

[A]

Yes.

[F]

So, yeah. So John wanted to answer this. So they use machine learning algorithms to try to answer this question. Can they predict whether people will move their left finger or their right finger before they say they made the decision?

[A]

Okay. And so if his algorithm could predict it, that means that there is a pattern in the brain saying, push the left button, push the right button before we are consciously aware of it. That would.

[D]

If he.

[A]

If he could predict it well. But if he couldn't predict it so well, we don't know what that blip is doing.

[F]

Yeah, here's what he found.

[C]

It turns out that you can make a prediction, but it's not perfect, which is quite interesting.

[F]

So it was about 60% accurate?

[C]

Yeah, yeah, something around 60%. So you're tossing a coin, you're at 50%. You can predict at 60%. So a little bit above chance, what

[A]

does that mean to you, Mara?

[F]

Well, I wasn't that impressed to be honest. 60%.

[A]

It's a fart above random chance, right? Yeah, yeah, yeah.

[F]

But, but then, so after a John study comes out, there was another group that did a similar experiment using a different technique. And zooming in on this time period right before people say they made the decision and they get it up to over 80%.

[A]

Uh huh. 80% now.

[F]

80%.

[A]

Okay, okay.

[F]

And other studies were coming out too, most of them all replicating the fact that like, yeah, there is something going on in the brain before people say they made a decision. And these studies end up being hugely influential. You know, John's study gets cited almost 3,000 times by other papers.

[A]

3,000 times.

[F]

Close to that. Yeah.

[A]

That is for the folks who are not complete nerds in the room. That is a hugely influential paper.

[F]

Yeah.

[A]

Okay. I don't see a paradox here though, because we still may have made the choice for that first domino to fall. Right. For that first brain activity. It's just that consciousness comes a little later, I guess.

[F]

You're kind of getting at like, what is the me. Like, is there some part of me that can still direct some neurons around without me being aware of it? Yes. Which still feels like it's really changing the idea of what free will means for most people. I think most people would say no. I know when I made my decision to flap my wrist.

[A]

Okay, okay.

[F]

It's not like some unconscious thing happening in my brain.

[A]

So people, scientists believe this. They believe. What are they, what do they.

[F]

They're arguing about.

[A]

They're arguing about it. Yeah.

[F]

Of course, on the one side, you have people who are like, take these studies and run with them to say like, so free will is an illusion. You know, clearly all these studies, that's what they're saying. We just, you know, our decisions are kind of being made without our conscious awareness. But then there's. There are other people, including lots of scientists, who are not convinced that these experiments mean that there's no free will. So up next, I'll tell you the most convincing argument that I could find on how free will is still totally compatible with all of this science.

[A]

Coming up.

[D]

This episode is brought to you by Accenture. When your advertising operations fall out of sync, everything else follows. Spotify and Accenture are working together to reinvent the rhythm of ad sales using automation, analytics and smarter workflows to simplify campaign delivery and access better data across the business. The result, Less time spent on operations, more time connecting brands with the moments and fandoms that matter most. Learn [e-mail] Spotify when you need to build up your team to handle the growing chaos at work, use Indeed Sponsored Jobs. It gives your job post the boost it needs to be seen and helps reach people with the right skills, certifications and more. Spend less time searching and more time actually interviewing candidates who check all your boxes. Listeners of this show will get a $75 sponsored job credit@ Indeed.com podcast. That's Indeed.com podcast. Terms and conditions apply. Need a hiring hero? This is a job for Indeed Sponsored Jobs.

[A]

This episode is brought to you by Facebook. So you were scrolling on Marketplace and there it was, the bike you'd been searching for.

[D]

You sent a message and it turned out the seller was super chatty, kind

[A]

of funny, and an avid cyclist. The next thing you know, you're in a cycling crew. Well, a community cycling group. The thing about Facebook, you might find more than what you're looking for from a browse to a bike ride this summer. Find more on Facebook

[E]

right now. Get up to 15% off select storage solutions put heavy duty HDX totes to good use, protecting what's important to you. The solid impact resistant design prevents cracking, and the clear base and sides make items easy to find even when the totes are stacked. Find select shelving and tote storage up to 15% off at the Home Depot. To organize every room in your home, from your garage to your attic, visit homedepot.com how doers get more done.

[A]

Welcome back. Today on the show, free will. Was I making a choice when I said that? Or that? Or that Meryl Horne is about to tell me why I did make that choice and I'm sorry about it as well.

[F]

That's okay. I'm making the choice to forgive you.

[A]

Or are you?

[F]

So, yeah, so far we've been building up this picture where there's no free will.

[A]

Right? Yes.

[F]

We've seen this evidence that our brains are kind of coming to decisions on their own before we're aware of it. But next we're gonna hear a different story. So let me introduce you to Sean Carroll. He's a theoretical physicist and professor at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. What's the best thing that you've done recently with your free will?

[B]

The best thing I've done recently with my free will? I think I've really perfected my French onion soup.

[F]

Ooh, I don't know.

[B]

Is that okay? Like, I really worked on this. You gotta spend a of time caramelizing the onions.

[A]

Yeah, I can never be bothered.

[F]

You rush it.

[A]

I just ate raw onions, basically. I mean, I haven't even attempted French.

[F]

I think I can see where your problem is. But besides cooking tips, you know, we also talked about how free will can exist alongside all the science that we've been talking about.

[A]

Okay.

[F]

And to me, the best way to explain this is to actually talk about something completely different. Let's talk about the weather.

[B]

Weather predictions use atmospheric science, fluid mechanics. When you talk about the atmosphere around you, what do you talk about? You talk about its temperature, the pressure, the humidity, the velocity of the wind, things like that.

[F]

So that's how we predict the weather. Temperature, pressure. Super useful concepts.

[A]

Yes.

[F]

But the weird thing is this stuff doesn't exist when we look at individual atoms and molecules that make up the weather. Like you can't look at one little atom and see that it's 20 degrees outside.

[A]

Uh huh, Yes. A tiny little atom doesn't know what's going on in the rest of the world.

[F]

You can't see these bigger, like these bigger things. Temperature, pressure, that kind of thing only emerges when you get a bunch of atoms together. And so, yeah, it's like you have to see how a bunch of these guys are all behaving together as a group to see certain properties.

[A]

Okay.

[F]

And that idea is called emergence.

[B]

The idea of emergence is there are multiple ways of talking about the universe. So we distinguish between the microscopic theory, that's the lower level theory with all the atoms and things like that, and then the emergent macroscopic, higher level theory where there's people and puppies and baseballs and stuff like that.

[A]

Mm. Okay.

[F]

So another example I like here is the ocean. Wendy, do you agree the ocean is real?

[B]

Shut up.

[A]

Game movie Arab used to be trapped. Yes, the ocean is real.

[F]

There are currents, there's tides. Everyone knows the ocean is real. Yes, but if you zoomed in and looked at like an individual water molecule, you can't see any of that stuff. It's not like you would see a teeny tiny wave in a water molecule. Those things only exist when you get a bunch of water molecules together doing all kinds of crazy stuff. Yes, and so maybe that's how free will works too. That feeling that you are the one choosing the ice cream, it's not necessarily an illusion, it's just emergent. Something that only appears at a higher level. Here's John.

[B]

The you that is making that decision is a sort of collective emergent phenomenon that comes out of all of the microscopic properties and processes going on in your brain, each one of which obeys the laws of biology. If we're talking about Neurons and synapses firing, etc, or the laws of physics. If we're talking about the atoms and

[F]

molecules, no matter what's happening in your brain with the neurons, that doesn't necessarily mean that what's happening at the higher level, this experience that we're having of making choices, it doesn't necessarily mean that that is, like, a fake experience or one that is, like, not real just because of, like, all the stuff happening at the lower levels. It's just like two separate levels.

[A]

Oh, the ocean is real. That's what he said.

[F]

The ocean is real.

[A]

The ocean is real, yeah. Okay, so where do we go from here then?

[F]

Well, so it's. This is basically what, like, now a lot of academics think is really important for understanding stuff like free will. Because maybe you can have a system that is sort of, you know, billiard balls, like this deterministic clockwork at the lower levels. But maybe things get weird and, like, indeterministic at, like, the higher you levels, which for me is like, it's still a little unsatisfying if we can't actually, like, you know, know how the, you know, me choosing my ice cream emerges from, like, neuron zapping each other. But Sean was kind of like, well, you know, it just might take us a long time to figure out exactly how the emergent properties come about.

[B]

I think there are so many examples of things that we never thought we'd be able to understand. Like, I'm sitting on this chair. Why doesn't it collapse? Back in the day, you would have just said, well, it just is. It's made of, you know, wood or metal or whatever. There's nothing deeper about it. But now we say, like, oh, no, we understand that it's made of atoms. And actually it took us a while to figure out why atoms take up space and have some solidity to them. And it took us even longer to figure out how the atoms get together and gang up and make a solid substance. But now we do, and we sort of take it for granted.

[F]

It took us like, a hundred years to figure out why chairs are solid. Like, yeah, we just started working on this whole free will thing in the brain. Like, just because we haven't figured it out yet doesn't mean free will is, like, fake.

[A]

Yes. Okay, so from your reaction to this, it feels like you still think we have free will.

[F]

I do. I mean, I think there's still. I still have questions, but, yeah, I don't think I. I don't think we have enough evidence to say it doesn't. Exist for sure.

[A]

And all of the brain studies are so basic. Press a button, don't press a button. Flap your hands, don't flap your hands. And there is a long way from that to, should I have children? Should I marry this person? You know, if we really don't have free will, these big complicated decisions that you think about day to day. I mean, for those who argue we don't have free will based on those brain studies, they are making the assumption that what happens in the brain when you have to make a literal flip decision is the same process as these bigger, complicated decisions that we're making. And that is an assumption.

[F]

Yeah, no, that's another criticism that some scientists have made too. Like, these little decisions that people are doing in the lab are just too simplistic to, like, really say anything about what's happening in our brain for much more complicated decisions. And one thing now that really annoys me that I see people doing is when they use those lab experiments kind of as an excuse to say, and therefore, like, we can do whatever we want. Like, we don't have any responsibility because, like, no matter what is happening in the brain, we still have the experience of making choices freely.

[A]

Yes.

[F]

So to just kind of pretend we

[A]

don't is BS what is the alternative? Right. You just watch the Matrix over and over and over again.

[F]

And remember Don, who did the seven second experiments?

[A]

Yes.

[F]

He also thinks some version of free will exists. Like, when his paper came out, it sounded like he was a little bemused by the fact that so many people were interpreting it as this, like, slight slam dunk against free will.

[C]

We were quite careful also, by the way, not to say in that 2008 paper that there's no free will. Which is interesting because people keep citing that paper and saying, we claim there is no free will. It actually doesn't say that we took that out of that paper deliberately so that we could publish the findings independent of the philosophical implications of the study.

[A]

So what does he think it means? Brains, then?

[F]

So where he comes down, where. And what I basically agree with is that, like, yeah, even though there are neurons doing stuff in the brain, before we make a decision, it's still us. And so maybe we do just need to expand that idea of, like, what we are. You know, there are tons of things that our brains are doing behind the scenes that we're not aware of. And that's all part of who. Who we are.

[A]

Yes. We are still the neurons kicking off that domino even before consciousness kicks in. But then it brings this whole Question of Meryl. What is consciousness?

[F]

Right.

[A]

Next time we tackle science and philosophy on Science Versus.

[F]

So I finally get to do my episode on consciousness. That's.

[A]

I mean, it's your free will, right? You could make that episode.

[F]

All right.

[A]

Thanks, Meryl.

[F]

Thanks, Wendy.

[A]

That is science versus free will. How many citations are in this week's episode? Mel?

[F]

We have 22 citations. So to find those, go to the Show Notes and you can find a link to the transcripts there. And we'll also put a link there to Sean Carroll's podcast Mindscape, and he just did a deep dive into free will recently with the Philosopher. That's a great episode. If you want to get an even nerdier take on this question, great.

[A]

This episode was produced by Meryl Horne with help from Rose Rimler, Aketti Foster, Keys, Michelle Dang and me, Wendy Zuckerman. We're edited by Blythe Terrell. I'm the executive producer. Fact checking by Erica Akiko Howard. Video editing and sound design by Bobby Lord. Music written by Bobby Lord, Bhumi Hidaka so Wiley, Emma Munger and Peter Leonard. Thanks to the researchers we spoke to for this episode, including Dr. Nicholas Rouleau and Dr. Andrea Lavazza. A special thanks to Chris Souter. Science Versus is a Spotify Studios original. You can join us for free on Spotify, YouTube, wherever you get your podcasts. We're everywhere. I'm Wendy Zuckerman. Back to you next time. Class is now in session and the UPS store is here to help you

[D]

ace arriving on campus. Our search certified packing experts can pack

[A]

everything you need, from desktops to decor.

[D]

Plus, when you pack and ship with us, you get our exclusive pack and ship guarantee. Your items arrive safe or your money back. Restrictions and limitations apply. To get a 20% off packing coupon and for full details, visit theupsstore.com packing

[F]

are we doomed? Looks at big problems nobody would rationally want nuclear war. That's not quite correct.

[B]

How can we add friction?

[F]

Put the launch codes inside somebody's chest cavity and you have to kill them to get them out. Are we doomed?

[B]

Solving humanity's biggest threats.

[F]

Part of the NPR network.

[B]

Listen wherever you get your podcasts.