top of page
Search

The Illusion of Free Will

  • graysonpitcock
  • Jan 6
  • 2 min read

Updated: Feb 8

Free will is typically assumed, a reassuring notion that we are writers of our destiny, making independent choices free from any determining agency. But examined closely, the myth unravels. The truth is that human choices aren't freely willed but are determined by external causes such as biology, environment, and culture. In other words, free will is an illusion.


The Myth of Choice

We would like to think that we're in charge of our actions, yet every choice we make depends on forces over which we have no control. Think about:


Biology: Our chemistry, genetics, and neurology impact our impulse, emotions, and actions. What neuroscience reveals is that the brain decides before we're consciously aware of having made a decision.


Upbringing and Environment: Whatever we learn during our upbringing determines our ambitions, fears, and values. Someone who has been brought up in an orthodox religious family will think differently from a person brought up in a secular, open-minded family. These initial impressions form the blueprint for all subsequent decisions.


Societal and Cultural Influence: Our conception of "right" and "wrong" is determined by the society we find ourselves in. Morality is not absolute; it varies with the times as a result of historical, political, and economic forces. If morality is socially constructed, then on what basis can we say we make genuinely independent moral decisions?


The Science Against Free Will

Neuroscience also poses a challenge to the existence of free will. The research of Benjamin Libet in the 1980s indicated that the brain decides milliseconds before the individual is consciously aware of having made a decision. The notion is supported by more recent studies, and it has been found that brain activity can determine issues seconds before the individual is consciously aware of having made a decision. If our unconscious mind controls what we do before our conscious mind decides, then free will is an illusion.


The Implications of Denying Free Will

If free will doesn't exist, what are the implications for personal responsibility, justice, and society? Some say that denying free will would result in chaos, but in fact, it could result in greater understanding and responsibility. Rather than blame people for their failings, we might address the structural and biological determinants of human behavior. Policies in criminal justice, education, and mental health may move away from punishment and toward rehabilitation based on the understanding that individuals are creations of their environment and not just rational choice-makers with conscious choices.


Conclusion: The Illusion of Autonomy

Free will is a reassuring but incorrect notion. Our behavior and thoughts are products of conditions we did not select—our genes, environment, and upbringing. Although we would like to believe that we are making our own decisions, our decisions are ultimately determined by forces over which we have no control. To accept that does not doom us to destiny but to an awareness of the tremendous complexity that lies behind all human activity and to a logical reasoning for the why we do what we do.


 
 
 

Comments

About Me

My name is Grayson Pitcock. I founded Philosophy Check, a philosophy blog and student discussion club.

I am a Bergen Catholic High School student and have spent most of my life living in Tenafly, which occupies five square miles in the northern end of New Jersey. With a 41.7% minority population, my hometown is diverse. Neighbors on my street speak Korean, Hebrew, Spanish, Hindi, and Russian. 

My family is multicultural. One side of my family, from the Midwest, has deep American roots dating back to the Revolutionary War, and the other side, from the East Coast, is a second-generation immigrant family of Korean ancestry. Although many aspects of my family upbringing may sound familiar, my multicultural background has enabled me to experience contrasting ideas, beliefs, and perspectives representing the diverse opinions of this vast country. Building relationships across differences happens nearly daily, both within and outside my family. 

I am interested in understanding how people can disagree profoundly yet still share space, community, and even friendship. Living in this environment has made me deeply curious about how people arrive at their beliefs, how truth is constructed and contested, and what it means to live ethically in a pluralistic society. I found myself drawn to philosophy because I was fascinated by the frameworks we use to ask questions about justice, morality, freedom, and self.

In my free time, my background also leads me to look for ways to bring people together in community advocacy, to support youth mental health and environmental justice. This means showing up fully, learning as I go, and getting others with me. Whether between different groups at school or in conversations where people don’t agree, I enjoy challenging myself and those around me to question their assumptions and see all sides of our choices while bridging gaps across divides. 

I am a part of a Youth Advisory Board for NJ4S, a state-led initiative that advocates for youth mental wellness in New Jersey. The Youth Advisory Board is a group of health care professionals, community organizers, and students who meet in person or virtually every month. Of the many communities that I am involved in, this one is significant to me in that I can see in others sharing the same belief I hold in community advocacy, of gathering experiences and building networks between communities and policymakers that can address the health needs of local communities in northern New Jersey. 

bottom of page