Interview
Luisa and Keiran on free will, and the consequences of never feeling enduring guilt or shame
- Kieran Harris anticipates that science will likely fully explain human behavior within the next 100 years, potentially identifying specific brain regions responsible for actions like murder.
- If global adherence to the view that free will is an illusion were to occur, the criminal justice system would shift from retribution to forward-looking protection, while roughly 14 percent of the population currently holds this belief, a figure comparable to the percentage of people who believe in God.
- The speaker predicts that many individuals who internalize the illusion of free will will become more altruistic and donate more money due to a realization of their inherent luck, while others might increase their work hours if freed from guilt-driven "must" motivations.
- Specific projections for Louisa include a potential reduction in stress, anxiety, and feelings of oppression, leading to increased happiness and a higher likelihood of feeling closer to the speaker's position after practicing the mental habit of questioning whether others could have done otherwise.
- Despite the removal of guilt and the subjective experience of pride, Louisa is expected not to become a worse friend, feel depressed about her achievements, or see her love for her partner diminish, as these traits would be viewed as unchosen physical characteristics rather than authored outcomes.
- The speaker estimates that while Louisa may not feel less guilt immediately, active work to embody the belief in a lack of control will eventually allow her to cut through shame and anger, potentially leading to gratitude for being in a body capable of following her preferences.
- Risks acknowledged include the possibility that the conversation is a terrible idea, that the hosts' views on free will are incorrect, and that the net cost of reducing guilt and shame remains uncertain.
- The speaker expresses skepticism regarding the efficacy of making prisons unpleasant as a disincentive for violent crimes and suggests that social acceptance of such a worldview could face hurdles, though friends would likely prefer genuine participation over guilt-motivated attendance.
- Even if empirically told that believing in the God of the Old Testament would improve the world, individuals are predicted to accept the claim without being able to choose belief, and individuals like Sam Harris are described as automating charitable giving despite deterministic beliefs.
- The "game" of adopting this worldview is framed as acceptance of luck and unluck rather than an effort to change outcomes, with the speaker noting that their own views on the nature of the universe would change if libertarian free will existed.