Free Will

On Ethics, Agency and Confusion

I’ve noticed recently quite a bit of talk about Free Will, seemingly driven by Robert Saplosky¹.

Back in the day, when I could listen to Sam Harris without vomiting, Free Will became one of his pet subjects. Even when I liked Sam, I could never understand what the hell he was saying, but my naïve B.C. Self (Before Covid) didn’t think too much of it.

Let’s start by listening to Sapolsky, in his own words. Or just read the summary.

This clip is from 2021 with Andrew Huberman.

But he has been doing the rounds again recently for example here he is with David Pakman last month.

Do We Have Free Will? | Robert Sapolsky & Andrew Huberman

Summary:

1. Absence of Free Will: The neurobiological stance presented is that humans do not possess any free will. This perspective is based on the argument that our choices and behaviors are the result of numerous factors that are beyond our conscious control. These factors range from immediate sensory environments and hormonal levels to long-term influences like cultural background and genetic predispositions.

2. Interconnected Influences: The argument emphasizes the interconnectedness of various biological and environmental factors. It suggests that behaviors are influenced by a complex interplay of genetics, brain chemistry, personal history, and cultural environment. The intricacy and integration of these factors leave little room for the concept of free will as an independent entity in human decision-making.

3. Domino Effect and Intervention: Sapolsky addresses the idea of the domino effect in human behavior, questioning whether awareness of these influences allows for any intervention in this deterministic process. The answer provided is negative, suggesting that while change is possible, it's not a result of self-directed, conscious choice, but rather a response to external factors and circumstances.

4. Change Through Circumstance: It's argued that while individuals can't change themselves due to the absence of free will, they can be changed by their circumstances. This view holds that learning and behavioral changes are possible, but they are the result of environmental influences rather than self-initiated actions.

5. Conservation of Neurobiology: The discussion highlights the conservation of neurobiological mechanisms across species, suggesting that the same fundamental processes underpinning learning and response to stimuli in simpler organisms are at work in humans.

6. Optimism and Change: Despite the deterministic view, Sapolsky suggests that understanding the possibility of change within a mechanistic framework can lead to optimism. This knowledge can make individuals more receptive to positive influences and more resilient against discouragement, indirectly facilitating a change in behavior and outlook.

7. Conclusion on Human Endeavor: Finally, Sapolsky concludes that striving to be better human beings is still a worthwhile endeavor. This is because the understanding of neurobiological mechanisms and the potential for change can influence how individuals respond to the world, leading to more positive and hopeful engagement with life's challenges.

---

A lot of people will believe this “neurobiological” BS. Why not, it lets them off the hook.

So much human cruelty could be avoided if we really embraced this idea. Every person whose ever done something bad is on some level just unlucky and still worthy of love and every good thing we’ve ever done isn’t something we need to take credit for as being better but something to be grateful for because of the good luck of having the right combo of genes and environment. - @ataraxia7439

Now let’s look at Daniel Natal’s short and incisive critique of this lunacy.

The War Against Free Will

1. Scientific Viewpoint: Stanford University neurobiologist Robert Sapolsky, after studying human and primate behavior for over 40 years, suggests that human behavior is largely beyond conscious control. He compares involuntary actions like the convulsions during a seizure, cell division, or heartbeats to human behavior, implying that much of what we do is not under our conscious control.

2. Ethical Implications: Natal delves into the ethical ramifications of this viewpoint. He argues that ethics and the concept of moral agency are founded on the premise of free will — the belief that individuals have the choice and control over their actions. If free will doesn't exist, this could fundamentally alter our understanding of morality, responsibility, and personal change.

3. Debate on Vice and Disease: Natal touches on the debate about classifying certain behaviors or conditions (like alcoholism or sexual orientations) as diseases rather than vices. This classification could imply that individuals are powerless to change these aspects, removing a sense of personal responsibility or moral agency.

4. Societal and Cultural Perspective: The discussion extends to how these concepts are applied in societal and cultural contexts, such as in discussions about crime, violence, and social movements. Natal points out how some arguments may inadvertently remove agency from certain groups or individuals, leading to a deterministic view of behavior.

5. Freedom and Vice: Lastly, Natal argues that viewing humans as devoid of free will can lead to a perspective where individuals are seen as incapable of escaping their vices and therefore never truly free. This ties back to the idea of moral agency and the capacity for self-improvement and change.

---

Natal is right when he says “…see what they’re doing here…”

Indeed, something is happening here, they are doing something.

Removing Free Will, removes Agency which removes Sovereignty².

While Agency is the capacity to act independently and make free choices, Sovereignty is having ultimate authority and control over one's own life, body, and decisions.

Diminish one, you diminish the other.

Diminishing Agency increases Dependence (on The State).

Who knows what Sapolsky thinks is going on here. Maybe he truly believes all this and is simply being used as a useful idiot tool and given as much airtime as possible.

It’s interesting to watch how people are being shepherded into new “alt” and “non-mainstream” silo’s only for the social engineering to happen there. The social engineering is far more effective this way as it immediately comes with an air of believability and credibility as it’s “not mainstream”.

It’s smart and sneaky and plenty of people will fall for it.

Another thought.

How it is that on the one hand I have no free will and no agency, but on the other hand the world will boil up and vaporize unless I use the right type of straw?

The same Great Narrative creators are pushing both paradigms on me.

This is Doublethink³.

Doublethink erodes a person's ability to think critically.

It serves other functions, including the creation of Cognitive Dissonance and Confusion.

These can be mined for Conformity, Compliance and Dependency⁴.

It’s a long game of seeding ideas that they are playing.

They dial it up and down over time, as they spray more and more of these ideas into the skies of or minds.

Seeing what they are up to makes it easier to protect ourselves and help others see it too.

I’ll leave you with the one and only George Carlin talking about how we are expected to save the planet.

Thanks for being here.

Please consider a paid subscription.

You will get nothing more for your support, as everything is made freely available. The money simply goes towards recovering some of the cost of this work.

I am always looking for good, personal GMC, covid and childhood vaccination stories. You can write to me privately: unbekoming@outlook.com

If you are Covid vaccine injured, consider the FLCCC Post-Vaccine Treatment

If you want to understand and “see” what baseline human health looks like, watch (and share) this 21 minutes

If you want to help someone, give them a book. Official Stories by Liam Scheff. Point them to a “safe” chapter (here and here), and they will find their way to vaccination.

Here are all eBooks and Summaries produced so far:

FREE Book Summary: The HPV Vaccine on Trial by Holland et al.

FREE Book Summary: Bitten by Kris Newby (Lyme Disease)

FREE Book Summary: The Great Cholesterol Con by Dr Malcolm Kendrick

FREE Book Summary: Propaganda by Edward Bernays

FREE Book Summary: Toxic Legacy by Stephanie Seneff (Glyphosate)

FREE Book Summary: The Measles Book by CHD

FREE Book Summary: The Deep Hot Biosphere by Thomas Gold (Abiogenic Oil)

FREE Book Summary: The Peanut Allergy Epidemic by Heather Fraser

FREE eBook: What is a woman? - “We don’t know yet.”

FREE eBook: The Climate™

FREE eBook: A letter to my two adult kids - Vaccines and the free spike protein

1. Robert Sapolsky

is an American neuroscientist, biologist, and author known for his research on stress in primates (including humans) and its effects on health. As of my last update in April 2023, here are some key aspects of his career and contributions:

1. Professional Background: Sapolsky is a professor of biology, neurology, and neurosurgery at Stanford University. He is also a research associate at the National Museums of Kenya.

2. Education: He holds a Ph.D. in neuroendocrinology from Rockefeller University. His postdoctoral work was conducted in the field of primatology.

3. Research Focus: Sapolsky's research has primarily focused on issues related to stress and its impact on health, particularly how prolonged stress can affect the body and brain. He has conducted extensive field research on the effects of stress on the savannah baboons of East Africa and has also researched the neurological effects of stress in humans.

4. Books and Publications: Sapolsky is a prolific author. His books include "Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers," which explores stress and stress-related diseases in humans; "Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst," which examines human behavior through the lens of biology; and "The Trouble with Testosterone," a collection of essays on various aspects of biology.

5. Public Speaking and Education: Known for his engaging and accessible style, Sapolsky is a popular public speaker and educator. He has delivered numerous lectures and has appeared in various media to discuss his research and its implications for understanding human health and behavior.

6. Awards and Recognition: Throughout his career, Sapolsky has received numerous awards and honors for his scientific contributions and his ability to communicate science to the public.

7. Advocacy and Outreach: In addition to his scientific work, Sapolsky is known for his efforts to communicate science to a broader audience and his advocacy for science education and mental health awareness.

Robert Sapolsky's work has been influential in increasing public understanding of the biological underpinnings of stress, behavior, and their impact on health. His approach often involves integrating interdisciplinary research from neurobiology, evolutionary biology, genetics, psychology, and anthropology.

2. Agency and Sovereignty

1. Definition of Terms:

   • Agency refers to an individual's capacity to act independently and make free choices.

   • Personal Sovereignty is the concept of having ultimate authority and control over one's own life, body, and decisions.

2. Impact of Weakened Agency on Personal Sovereignty:

   • Reduced Control and Autonomy: Weakening an individual's agency diminishes their ability to make independent decisions. This reduction in decision-making power directly impacts their personal sovereignty, as it limits their control over their own life and choices.

   • Vulnerability to External Influence: With weakened agency, individuals are more susceptible to external influences and manipulation. This susceptibility can lead to situations where others make decisions on their behalf, further eroding their personal sovereignty.

   • Dependency and Loss of Self-Efficacy: A lack of agency often leads to increased dependency on others, whether individuals or institutions. This dependency can diminish a person's sense of self-efficacy and their belief in their ability to control their life, which are key components of personal sovereignty.

   • Emotional and Psychological Effects: Reduced agency can have significant emotional and psychological effects, such as feelings of helplessness, decreased self-esteem, and a sense of loss of identity. These effects can further undermine personal sovereignty by impairing an individual's ability to assert themselves and their interests.

In essence, the relationship between agency and personal sovereignty is such that a decrease in one's ability to act independently and make free choices (agency) can lead to a corresponding decrease in their control over their own life and decisions (personal sovereignty). Restoring or enhancing agency is thus crucial for maintaining or strengthening personal sovereignty.

3. Doublethink

is a concept that originates from George Orwell's novel "1984," which is a critique of totalitarian regimes. It refers to the ability to hold two completely contradictory beliefs at the same time and to accept both of them as true. This concept is used as a tool for psychological manipulation and control in the novel's dystopian society.

Here's a simple way to understand doublethink:

1. Contradictory Beliefs: Imagine you are told to believe two opposing ideas. For example, you are told to believe that the sky is blue, but at the same time, you are also told to believe that the sky is green. Both statements contradict each other, yet in doublethink, you accept both as true simultaneously.

2. Acceptance and Rejection of Reality: Doublethink involves accepting both of these contradictory beliefs without acknowledging the inconsistency between them. It requires an individual to accept a version of reality that is dictated by an authority, even if it goes against their own experience or understanding of the truth.

3. Use in Totalitarian Control: In the context of Orwell's novel, doublethink is used by the ruling party to control the population. By manipulating people's understanding of truth, the party can change historical facts, alter records, and present contradictory statements, all while expecting the populace to accept these without question. This manipulation creates confusion and cognitive dissonance, making it easier to control people's thoughts and actions.

4. Impact on Critical Thinking: Doublethink erodes a person's ability to think critically and question authority. When individuals are trained to uncritically accept contradictory beliefs, they lose the capacity to discern truth from falsehood, making them more susceptible to manipulation and control.

In essence, doublethink is a concept that demonstrates the power of thought control and the manipulation of reality, often used in discussions about propaganda, psychological manipulation, and the importance of critical thinking in the face of authoritative statements.

4. Cognitive Dissonance and Confusion

are valuable tools for a totalitarian state in maintaining control and suppressing dissent. Here's how these psychological states contribute to the effectiveness of such regimes:

1. Undermining Rational Thought: Cognitive dissonance, the mental discomfort experienced when holding two or more contradictory beliefs, values, or ideas, can undermine rational thought and critical thinking skills. By bombarding citizens with contradictory information or propaganda, a totalitarian state can create a populace that is less capable of logical reasoning and more likely to accept incongruous ideas without question.

2. Promoting Conformity: When individuals experience cognitive dissonance, they often seek to reduce the discomfort it causes. In a totalitarian state, one way to achieve this is by aligning with the state's ideology, even if it conflicts with personal beliefs. This alignment fosters conformity and discourages dissent.

3. Control Through Confusion: Confusion can be a powerful control mechanism. By constantly changing narratives and rewriting history, a totalitarian state can keep its citizens in a state of uncertainty and confusion. When people are unsure of what is true, they are less likely to challenge authority and more likely to rely on the state for guidance and stability.

4. Suppressing Opposition: In a climate of confusion and cognitive dissonance, organizing effective opposition becomes difficult. Conflicting information can lead to a lack of consensus among potential dissenters, weakening resistance movements and making it easier for the state to control or dismantle them.

5. Dependency on the State: A state that fosters confusion and cognitive dissonance can position itself as the only reliable source of truth and order. This creates a dependent populace that turns to the state for direction and clarity, enhancing the state’s power and authority.

6. Justification of Authoritarian Measures: A confused and dissonant populace may be more accepting of authoritarian measures, especially if these measures are presented as solutions to the very confusion and disorder the state has created. This can include the acceptance of surveillance, restrictions on freedom, and the erosion of civil liberties.

7. Creating a Controllable Narrative: Cognitive dissonance and confusion allow a totalitarian state to manipulate public perception and opinion more easily. By controlling the narrative and information flow, the state can shape public attitudes and opinions to align with its goals.

In summary, cognitive dissonance and confusion can be strategically used by totalitarian regimes to weaken critical thinking, foster conformity, create dependency, suppress opposition, and justify authoritarian control, all of which are essential for maintaining power and control over the populace.