Free Will

This is a short book in which Harris pretty convincingly argues the case against the idea that we can do other than we do and also briefly considers the motivational, moral and political implications of accepting such a view. Central to Harris's argument is his view that not only is free will incompatible with objective descriptions of behaviour but also with our subjective experience: thus "the illusion of free will is in itself an illusion". In our subjective experience thoughts arise and take hold (or not) in ways that are subjectively if not theoretically mysterious (i.e. theoretically they arise from our brain states that are in themselves formed of chains of biologically coded influence). He writes vividly of his own 'choices' to show the determinism that is apparent if one carefully reflects on ordinary experience; "the choice you make will come out of the darkness of prior causes that you, the conscious witness of your experience, did not bring into being". He acknowledges, however, that our efforts matter and that we can alter the framework of our influences to make certain kinds of 'choices' more likely. He rejects that this entails free will but insofar as it acknowledges that we are causally relevant agents in the direction of our lives it seems to me that he comes close. If you find this review a bit heavy going, that is because I have needed to be succinct - the book itself is a much easier read. I recommend this book strongly to anyone who wants an accessible chew on the gristle of this fundamental and intriguing problem. Of course, whether or not you choose to follow this up is all a matter of determinism...

I've read all six of Sam Harris's books in the last few months, and picking a favourite would be like asking a mother to pick her favourite child, but if I had to rank them from "best" to just "excellent", Free Will would come near the top. Drawing on his expertise as both a neuroscientist and an experienced meditator, Harris explores the age-old philosophical question, "do we have free will? Are we truly the conscious authors of our actions, or are we just fixed-track automatons living under the delusion that we have control?" The question itself is nothing new, and numerous answers have been offered over the years, ranging ranging from the interesting and insightful to the confusing, meaningless, and masturbatory. Can Harris bring anything new to the table? To me: yes. Granted, I have no formal training in philosophy and am not familiar with the huge body of work that already exists on this subject, but Free Will isn't intended to be an all-encompassing philosophical treatise to be kept on dusty university library shelves and only ever pondered by PhDs. It's a succinct and incisive opinion piece that's open to all comers, and I found Harris's arguments to be eye-opening and authoritative - delivered with his trademark ability to steamroll any intellectual opponent in his path. Without meaning to spoil the ending, Harris's own answer to the question "do we have free will?" is a resounding "no". His arguments have been formulated in both the philosophy department and the research lab - and I found them convincing from all angles. We don't choose our thoughts - our thoughts simple arise in the brain uninvited, and anyone who's ever tried just 5 minutes of meditation can tell you first-hand how difficult it is to get even a hint of control over the contents of our own heads. Recent advances in brain imaging have also shown that we're able to predict with high accuracy the decisions a person is going to make *long before the person in question feels like they've actually made the decision.* If other people can predict our actions before we even know them ourselves, what space does this leave for free will as the genesis of those actions? I'm not sure there's any, and reading this book has made me acutely aware of just how little of the behaviour I consider to be "me" is the result of conscious choice - if that choice could ever be said to be "conscious" at all. My main criticism of this book is that it's very short - more of a pamphlet than a book - but at £2.99 for the Kindle version, it's not a major complaint. Also, if you've read "Waking Up" by the same author, there's a fair amount of overlap between the two books (including a few passages that seem be copied and pasted directly from one book to the other), so you may get the occasional sense of deja vu as you read Free Will, but its "exclusive" sections are more than enough to justify the low cost and the short amount of time it will take you to read it. Read this book. It's not like you have a choice.

Sam Harris takes on one of the biggest questions about what we think defines humanity. Free Will. Surely that's a given, if we don't have free will, then what can we be, Without Free Will, then we are simply robots? As always, Sam Harris doesn't disappoint, he will answer this question in the most informative and truthful way that he can discover, no matter what the outcome ! As the brilliant scientist Richard Feynman once said ""Nature is there, and she's gonna come out the way she is" Free Will as it seems, is an illusion (which is not really that surprising if you consider the whole nature/nurture process), but to be absolutely critical of Sam's interpretation, he does not go far enough. Sam still eludes to the perception that although free will is eradicated, somehow, what we actually do in real life, is still important in an individual sense ? i.e. - this post would not have happened if I didn't actually write it, and post it ! Is that not the point ? This isn't written and posted due to "Free Will", but simply a pre-conceived response, which was actually determined before I was born. So that's determinism then ? As a post script, I have to yet again thank Sam Harris for producing the most thought compelling books. posts, webcasts et al . What a pleasure it is to read everything he produces (whether I completely agree or not, but 99% do agree) We don't have enough critical thinkers at the moment, or they simply just don't get the "airplay". If you haven't read this book, then please do, and take your time to understand the concepts, as they may be disturbing to what you accept as your own self. It may frighten you, and it may astound you, but whichever way, it will enlighten you !

It's short, assured and to the point and potentially devastating if like me you "believe" in "free will". I could not rebut him on his own terms but I do not accept his terms. That said, I think that any non mystical response would have to address his points or at least undermine them. For my part I think that the idea of free will as an uncaused will never made sense (even for a purported god). From my perspective free will is not simply compatible with an ordered universe (I think determinism is often overstated and Harris is probably in this territory but as he states Chaos does not help free will advocates) but depends on it. In short the will that I have is always bound to me in a context that precedes my choices but is not completely removed from them. It is not FREE in some unbounded mystical sense but it is still my will and is free to the degree that the outcomes I achieve are congruent with my desires. Did I chose those desires: no but that does not seem critical to me so long as I feel they were not imposed on me by a third party and I think this is what most of us mean. Science done by other humans with other desires says otherwise but if their choices are as predetermined as mine then their belief is not qualitively different from mine. In both cases the belief is a product of forces beyond our control... That's not to deny the power of science but a tool that has evolved to study the world by removing human subjectivity may not be the best tool for guiding human belief and human action in a universe where our becoming is no less a part of the structure of reality than the movements of particles or the interactions of fields. Indeed the way that science undertands these things cannot be understood without recognising the role of agency and will in that process.

Interesting read, but slightly disappointed. He makes the point that our current physics understanding allows no room at all for free will - though actually he doesn't really make that point, he starts from there. But then, he says that since we have no free will, we should alter our approach to things like the criminal justice system and punishment (how can you punish someone who had no choice in their actions?). Well OK, but hang on, we have no free will, so how can we decide to alter our approach - since we have no free will to make that decision? He also says there is still room for taking a moral approach to life - but I could not see his logic, the same argument would surely apply. It seems to me that having or not having free will is like being a bit pregnant - you either are or you aren't, there is no halfway house. Either I had a choice as to whether to write this review, or I didn't. If I did have a choice, things may have influenced me, but in the end the choice was mine to balance the influences. But if I have no free will, there are no choices to be made. Nonetheless, interesting to read and thought provoking - which is surely the point, and quite succinct and short. I agree with others though that the quality of the binding and page cutting leaves a bit to be desired.

Excellent really enjoyed it. Great insight into human behaviour without getting too esoteric..excuse the big word

At the risk of sounding arrogant, let me start by saying I am an amateur reader of philosophy at best. I have read and studied it for years...but only as a hobby. My opinion counts for nothing...in fact, I'm surprised you're still reading this. Now my apology is out of the way, let me give you some condescending instructions: 1) If you are new to existentialism, nihilism, humanism, etc. do not read this yet. Buy it. Decorate your bookshelf with it. Use it as a coaster. Swat a fly with it. But don't read it...YET! The book is short. Very short. But it is profound, advanced stuff, and trust me when I say you have to be ready for it! We grow up in a society that encourages freedom of independent thought, freewill, responsibility for our actions...this book brings this crashing down. Philosophy is a process. It takes time to read, longer to understand, and even longer to truly accept. There is no time limit for how long it takes to "get it"...take as long as you need...but it does require a lot of brain power, and don't move on to the next big idea until you have the foundations set and solid. This is the next big step... 2) For the rest of you...Harris needs no introduction to seasoned readers of our contemporary philosophers. Indirectly mentored by the modern greats (Dennet, Dawkins, Hitchens, etc.) he is one of philosophy and atheism's leading champions. This book argues that determinism is. Note this is not the same as predeterminism. There is no plan mapped out somewhere for the decisions we will make, or the events that will follow. But, our decisions are a product of our thoughts. Our thoughts are a product of the chemicals in our brain. We have no control over the release of these chemicals. Our chosen environment is a product of our upbringing. Our upbringing was chosen for us by our parents. Their decisions are not their own either. It is very difficult to argue against the points Sam makes in this book. It's short, because it's such a fundamentally basic argument. However, the implications are staggering! Note, they are not terrifying. Just as nihilism leads to existentialism, our lack of freewill is only a scary thought as we cling to the belief that it is something we need. Once you understand it is something we don't have...indeed, something we have never had...the world starts to make much more sense. Why not 5 stars? The writing isn't particularly polished. Whilst the book is short, it could have been even shorter. Sam Harris drags it out just to give it the semblance of being a book, although it probably should have just been a short essay. Worth the money though - the idea is incredible. Whilst not original, Sam's position in the public eye has helped bring the philosophy to a wider audience. Also, I am not convinced by Sam's moral argument. As well as reading the book, I have also heard him argue the philosophy at debates and he tries to argue that, even though we don't have freewill, we should be held morally accountable. He explains why he thinks this, but, whilst I would ideally love to believe this and am still trying to comprehend his argument, at present I see it as being an idealistic want and just don't quite buy it. Maybe I'm just not quite ready to...

This is a great overview of the arguments for hard determinism and a puts forward a very convincing argument for rejecting free will. Harris writes well and challenges are preconceived ideas very effectively. I would recommend this product to those people interested in the Free Will debate, rather than an introduction to the main ideas, and to those who have some background in Philosophy and/or Psychology, otherwise you might find it hard-going