Some Thoughts on Free Will
I’m endlessly fascinated by the debate over mammalian free will—or, more accurately, our lack of free will, as argued by author and neuroscientist Sam Harris and legendary biologist Dr. Robert Sapolsky. Despite substantial scientific evidence supporting the "no free will" position, most people still firmly believe we have it. They trust their intuition over the science, and honestly, I get it—sort of.
As a spiritually minded atheist and someone who leans heavily on scientific proof, I’m squarely in the "we don’t have free will" camp. I see the logical holes in the arguments of those who refuse to accept the science. And yet, despite my confidence in the evidence, I’ve never been able to fully shake the nagging feeling that something about the "no free will" conclusion doesn’t sit quite right.
The other night, I woke up suddenly with the following question nagging at me: Could it be that the evidence against free will only appears that way because we have yet to fully crack the mystery of consciousness?
Consider this: human consciousness is one of the greatest enigmas in science. It’s undeniably real, profoundly powerful, and maddeningly mysterious. What if, when we finally understand consciousness — how it works, what it is — we also discover that free will has been part of the equation all along?
Could it be that free will, this thing we intuitively feel we possess, is a missing puzzle piece in the larger mystery of consciousness? What if it’s not an illusion, as science currently suggests, but an integral aspect of consciousness itself — a kind on free rider on the back of consciousness? And pushing further: is it possible that free will is consciousness? That they are, in fact, one and the same?
I understand that this line of thinking is speculative, maybe even naïve. But I can’t help asking: what if the "no free will" conclusion feels off to so many of us because it is? What if dismissing free will outright is premature, the result of trying to solve the problem with only part of the picture?
Maybe I’m wrong — likely I am — but shouldn't we be asking these "what if" questions. Science thrives on curiosity and challenging dogma, and if something doesn’t feel right, isn’t it worth asking why?