Владислав Педдер – The Existential Limits of Reason (страница 8)
Pessimism, existentialism, and nihilism represent not just philosophical doctrines but also a process of forecasting that arises from erroneous predictions and exaggerated expectations. Beginning as an attempt to explain uncertainty and crisis, these movements gradually spiral, amplifying the significance of the problem and reaching extremes. As a result, what initially started as a search for meaning and an effort to overcome existential limits transforms into extreme forms of despair and philosophical nihilism. We will examine this in more detail in Chapter 3.
These philosophies, to some extent, become a logical consequence of how errors in forecasting and distortions in the perception of uncertainty can lead to a radical reassessment of human nature and its place in the world. They do not always offer solutions, but they raise fundamental questions about our ability to construct a meaningful life in the face of the uncertainty we encounter.
An example of a more honest approach within existentialism is the philosopher Albert Camus. Camus emphasizes the moment when Sisyphus, the absurd hero of his work, becomes aware of the meaninglessness of his existence and his condemnation to endless struggle. However, Camus does not advocate denying reality but rather accepting it. For Sisyphus, despite recognizing the absurd, his life does not lose its value. He becomes happy because he acknowledges his fate and accepts it – not in submission, but in defiance. This acceptance is not passive but an active act in which he finds inner freedom and harmony, continuing his labor despite its futility. Camus argues that although Sisyphus’s struggle is absurd, meaning and happiness can still be found in that absurdity if one abandons the search for ultimate answers and embraces reality as it is.
Chapter 2. Ways of Adapting to Existential Limits
In the first chapter, we arrived at the realization that the world, as it is, is the result of random interactions and self-organization, devoid of any ultimate purpose or higher design. This understanding, coupled with chaos and unpredictability, presents a profound existential problem for the human mind. How can we make decisions and take action when the future is beyond prediction? In this chapter, we will examine existential fears and limits of the mind, such as free will, death, and the complete absence of meaning, through scientific and philosophical works. Since these are eternal themes that will persist as long as there is a self-aware mind, instead of reiterating the ideas of past geniuses, we will focus on the works of the 20th and early 21st centuries, as their works, in a sense, already encapsulate the conclusions of the past.
The next section explores free will as an adaptive tool. We will examine its neurobiological and cognitive foundations, the influence of genetics and environment on its formation, and the illusion of this concept in light of contemporary research. Through this lens, we will understand how free will becomes a means of organizing chaos and a tool for adapting to the ultimate complexity of existence.
1. Free Will as a Tool for Information Processing
Although the brain operates within certain patterns and predictions, we continue to experience a sense of free will. This is because the brain does not process all information directly; instead, it works with the most probable hypotheses and models. As a result, we perceive ourselves as independent agents making decisions, even though, at a deeper level, our brain is always functioning within deterministic patterns, whose predictions simplify perception and adaptation.
This also explains why we feel free, even though, at a deeper level, the brain is guided by certain probabilistic models. The brain conserves resources by processing not all information, but only the most likely events, making it more flexible and adaptive. This allows us to respond quickly to changes in the environment without wasting excessive energy on data processing, which ultimately gives us the sensation of free will.
Robert Sapolsky is an American neuroendocrinologist, biologist, anthropologist, and writer, known for his work on human behavior, its biological foundations, and the mechanisms of stress. He holds a professorship at Stanford University and has spent over three decades researching how neurobiology, genetics, and the environment shape human behavior. In addition to his primary work as a biologist, Sapolsky is well-known for his popular books, such as Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst and Determined: A Science of Life Without Free Will. These works offer revolutionary perspectives on the nature of human behavior, challenging traditional views on free will and moral responsibility.
Neurobiological Evidence
Sapolsky refers to the research of Michael Gazzaniga, who worked with patients with a split corpus callosum to demonstrate the absence of free will. Patients with separated hemispheres of the brain exhibited striking examples of how consciousness interprets and explains actions that were not actually the result of conscious decision-making. When one hemisphere performs an action, the patient is not always able to explain why it occurred. Gazzaniga found that the left hemisphere of the brain, which is associated with speech and explanation, often fabricates justifications for actions performed by the right hemisphere. This supports the notion that our consciousness is not always connected to the actual decision-making process.
“Neurobiology shows that often we are unaware of the true causes of our behavior. When the left hemisphere explains the actions of the right, it does so based on its perception, not the actual caus3” (
This example illustrates the idea that we perceive ourselves as free agents, but in reality, many of our decisions and actions are the result of unconscious processes.
Illusion of Free Will
One of the central aspects of the book is the concept of the “illusion of free will.” Sapolsky argues that, despite our belief in free choice, all of our decisions are actually determined by biological, neurobiological, and social factors. We perceive ourselves as free agents because we are unaware of the entire chain of mechanisms that actually lead to our behavior. Sapolsky uses the metaphor of “illusion”: we see ourselves as free agents because we fail to notice the deeper mechanisms that influence our actions.
“We believe that we control our actions because we don’t see the chain of biological factors that lead to our decisions. It’s simply an illusion that we make decisions consciously” (
He provides examples where reactions to external stimuli occur before we become aware of them. For instance, if a person faces danger, their body may immediately react based on instinctive responses (such as an increase in adrenaline) before they consciously realize what has happened. This confirms that our behavior is often predetermined by unconscious reactions occurring in our brain..
Генетика и влияние на поведение
Сапольски также подчеркивает важность генетики в детерминированности нашего поведения. Он приводит примеры генетических мутаций, таких как изменения в гене MAOA, который связан с повышенной склонностью к агрессии. Это генетическое влияние может существенно изменять поведение, и, по мнению Сапольски, такие данные показывают, что наша личность и поведение во многом предопределены нашим геном, а не являются результатом свободного выбора.
“Генетика вносит большой вклад в формирование нашей личности. Даже такие черты, как склонность к агрессии, могут быть предопределены нашими генами” (
Влияние окружения и воспитания
Окружение и воспитание также играют значительную роль в формировании нашего поведения. Сапольски акцентирует внимание на том, как стрессовые события могут сильно повлиять на принятие решений. В частности, стресс может снизить нашу способность к рациональному мышлению, делая нас более склонными к импульсивным решениям. Это также подтверждает, что наши действия во многом предопределены внешними обстоятельствами, а не свободной волей.
“Когда мы находимся под стрессом, наш мозг начинает работать иначе, что делает нас более склонными к агрессии или импульсивным поступкам. Это означает, что даже в моменты напряжения наши действия детерминированы” (
The Role of Neuropeptides and Hormones in Behavior
Sapolsky provides an in-depth discussion on how hormones, such as oxytocin, can significantly influence our social interactions. He presents examples illustrating how an increase in oxytocin levels can make individuals more trusting and altruistic, whereas a decrease can lead to aggression and distrust.
“Hormones such as oxytocin play a crucial role in our behavior. We cannot control their levels, and it is often these biochemical factors that determine how we relate to others” (