Neuroethics and Free Will in Humans

        An interdisciplinary effort to reach a general conclusion, within any research project, has always resulted in a more conclusive and distinct outcome when compared to other approaches. In this case, the integration of neuroscientists and philosophers alike helped seek an answer to a question never before answered: do humans possess free will or are our actions essentially pre-determined for us in our unconscious mind? 

The branch of neuroethics (under which this prompt was attempted to be answered) concerns itself with moral issues within research investigations. Additionally, it strives to solve philosophic questions through a scientific perspective. Particularly, in this study, the existence of individuals' free will was measured using electroencephalograms (EEGs) and statistical pattern recognition techniques. (Siong Soon et. al) With such methods, readiness potentials were monitored, which supplied researchers a way to pinpoint decision-making processes during conscious and unconscious intervals.

Fundación, C. (2010). Expanding the Frontiers of Neuroethics [Digital image]. Retrieved October 18, 2017, from http://www.fundacioncrimson.org/program.php?p=24&subsec=program

      From the diverse experiments performed concerning this topic, neuroethic investigators concluded that there is no free will. This determination is due to the fact that scientists have been able to predict subjects' final decisions up to 200ms before they became consciously aware of their own final choice. Consequently, it has been deducted that our unconscious mind pre-determines our decisions, although this claim has only been accurately proven to be true 80% of the time. 

To this resolution, Dr. Joe Vukov found five reasons why free will cannot be discarded from neuroethics yet:

1. Empirical Disparity, where he viewed a dissimilarity between interpretations throughout different investigations, specifically regarding the time where researchers could determine the individuals' final decision in their unconscious mind.
2. Probability is not enough to reject free will. The likelihood that the choice viewed in the unconscious mind will be pursued and/or carried out by the person is currently only a prediction. No study has proved to be 100% accurate in assuming a person's decision-making outcomes.
3. Free actions are more complex than what researchers show. The selections carried out in each research project, throughout these investigations, have been that of short-term, impulsive nature. Therefore, for decisions that are long-term and require more thought, these findings cannot be generalized and applied to these circumstances. As a result, the "no free will" claim might not apply to such cases.
4. Why can't our unconscious not be considered to form part of our free will?
5. Lastly, the definition of "free will" varies throughout disciplines and also within them. This, successively, causes the interpretations of each finding to change accordingly. For philosophers, free will can be defined by "acting rationally and without coercion." (Vukov) This complies with the philosophical, dualistic view of free will, according to William Irwin. Nonetheless, from a materialistic perspective (another branch within philosophy), "there is no place in the causal chain of material things for the will to act in an uncaused way. Thus only one outcome of my decision-making process is possible." (Irwin) Obviously, inconsistency between the meaning of free will causes the conclusion of the previous research studies to become prone to faultiness.  

Just like this last critique, the resolution deducted from these past investigations can be interpreted differently from person to person. Input on every beings’ behalf, though, increases the like hood of eventually getting to a precise answer. 

Works Cited

Irwin, W. (2015, November 2). How to Live a Lie. The New York Times. Retrieved October 16, 2017, from https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/11/02/how-to-live-a-lie/

Siong Soon, C., Brass, M., Heinze, H., & Haynes, J. (2008). Unconscious determinants of free decisions in the human brain. Nature Neuroscience, 1-3. Retrieved October 15, 2017, from https://luc.app.box.com/v/neuroseminar/file/216116077901