Atomism, «Summa Theologica» and B. Libet’s experiments: contradictions in solutions to the problem of the subject’s free will
Philosophy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17072/2078-7898/2023-1-28-39Keywords:
free will, determinism, atomism, Thomas Aquinas, B. Libet’s experiments, necessity, chanceAbstract
The article deals with the contradictions that arise when solving the problem of the subject’s free will. A thesis is put forward that these contradictions are caused by the discrepancy between the views on free will and the ontological foundations from which they are derived. This thesis is consistently proved on the basis of both the historical and philosophical material and the modern discussion that unfolded after the discoveries of B. Libet and his followers. An analysis of the ideas of Thomas Aquinas reveals a number of insurmountable contradictions indicating the impossibility of combining the free will of a subject and the theological principle of providentialism. The approaches of the philosophers of the Renaissance and the New Age to the indicated problem are considered, these being associated with an attempt to overcome this contradiction and again turn philosophical thought to natural philosophy. The dialectical approach of Immanuel Kant is presented as taking a certain step toward resolving the contradictions through linking free will with the concept of morality and duty. The philosophical interpretation of B. Libet’s experiments is analyzed and the idea of conscious decisions of a person as determined by the activity of his neurons is refuted. Such an erroneous thesis is derived from the «flat ontology» paradigm. The popularity of this approach is due to the difficulty in resolving the psychophysiological problem and the lack of understanding of the mechanisms for the transition of biologically determined processes of the material substrate to the field of the ideal. The groundlessness of such a conclusion is explained by biological reduction and the vulgar materialistic approach of modern authors, similar to the ideas of Democritus or Epicurus, who derived free will from the movement of atoms. All the examples considered in the article clearly demonstrate the fallacy of attempts to derive free will or its absence from something external to a person. The thesis that free will must be immanently inherent in man is substantiated. To solve the problem of free will, it is necessary not only to rely on the data of scientific discoveries but also to approach their interpretation dialectically.References
Керимов Т. «Онтологический поворот» в социальных науках: возвращение эпистемологии // Социологическое обозрение. 2022. Т. 21, № 1. С. 109–130.
Краткий философский словарь / отв. ред. А.П. Алексеев. 2-е изд., перераб. и доп. M.: TK Велби: Проспект, 2008. 496 с.
Лейбниц Г.В. Опыты теодицеи о благости Божией, свободе человека и начале зла // Лейбниц Г.В. Сочинения: в 4 т. М.: Мысль, 1989. Т. 4. 554 с.
Лоскутов Ю.В. «Плоская онтология» в социальном контексте // Новые идеи в философии. 2021. Вып. 8(29). С. 89–98.
Лурье С.Я. Демокрит. Тексты. Перевод. Л.: Наука, 1970. 664 с.
Маркс К. Различие между натурфилософией Демокрита и натурфилософией Эпикура // Маркс К., Энгельс Ф. Соч.: в 50 т. 2-е изд. М.: Политиздат, 1975. Т. 40. С. 147–233.
Мартин Лютер. О свободе христианина / сост., вступ. статья, пер. с нем., коммент., примеч. И. Фокина. Уфа: ARC, 2013. 728 с. Мишура А.С. Свобода в мире: защита экстерналистского либертарианства // Вопросы философии. 2019. № 8. С. 49–58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31857/s004287440006032-0
Момджян К.Х. Социально-философский анализ феномена свободной воли // Вопросы философии. 2017. № 9. С. 68–81.
Новая философская энциклопедия: в 4 т. Т. 3. / научно-ред. совет: В.С. Степин, А.А. Гусейнов, Г.Ю. Семигин, А.П. Огурцов; Ин-т философии РАН, Нац. общ.-научн. фонд; М.: Мысль, 2010. 694 с.
Пархоменко Р.Н. Генезис идеи свободы в западноевропейской философии // Философская мысль. 2012. № 4. С. 179–210. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7256/2306-0174.2012.4.146
Пархоменко Р.Н. Понятие идеи свободы в античной и средневековой философии // Философия и культура. 2013. № 5. C. 701–708. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7256/1999-2793.2013.05.12
Секацкая М.А. Философская значимость исследований свободы воли в нейронауке на примере интерпретаций экспериментов Б. Либета // Вопросы философии. 2020. № 7. С. 113‒123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2020-7-113-123
Спиноза Б. Приложение, содержащее метафизические мысли // Спиноза Б. Избр. произв: в 2 т. М.: Политиздат, 1957. Т. I. С. 265–316. Фома Аквинский. Сумма теологии. Ч. I: Вопросы 1–43. Киев: Ника-Центр: Эльга, 2002. 560 с.
Юрасов А.А. В чем заключается проблема свободы воли? // Контекст и рефлексия: философия о мире и человеке. 2021. Т. 10. № 2A. С. 5–10.
Dennett D.C. Freedom Evolves. N.Y.: Viking, 2003. 368 p. Libet B. Unconscious Cerebral Initiative and the Role of Conscious Will in Voluntary Action // The Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1985. Vol. 8, iss. 4. P. 529–539. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x00044903
Schultze-Kraft M., Birman D., Rusconi M., Allefeld C. et al. The point of no return in vetoing selfinitiated movements // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2015. Vol. 113, iss. 4.
P. 1080–1085. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/ pnas.1513569112
Mele A. Free: Why Science Hasn’t Disproved Free Will. N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 2014. 112 p.
References
Alekseev, A.P. (2008). Kratkiy filosofskiy slovar’ [Brief Philosophical Dictionary]. 2nd ed. Moscow: TK Welby Publ., Prospect Publ., 496 p.
Dennett, D.C. (2003). Freedom Evolves. New York: Viking, 368 p.
Kerimov, T. (2022). The «Ontological Turn» in the social sciences: the return of epistemology]. Sotsiologicheskoye obozreniye [Sociological Review]. Vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 109–130.
Leibniz, G.V. (1989). [Experiments of theodicy about the goodness of God, freedom of man and the beginning of evil]. Leybnits G.V. Sochineniya: v 4 t. [Leibniz G.V. Works: in 4 vols]. Moscow: Mysl’ Publ., vol. 4, 554 p.
Libet, B. (1985). Unconscious cerebral initiative and the role of conscious will in voluntary action. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences. Vol. 8, iss. 4, pp. 529–539. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x00044903
Loskutov, Yu.V. (2021). [«Flat ontology» in the social context]. Novye idei v filosofii [New Ideas in Philosophy]. Iss. 8(29), pp. 89–98.
Lurie, S. (1970). Demokrit. Teksty. Perevod [Democritus. Texts. Translation]. Leningrad: Nauka, 664 p.
Marx, K. (1975). [The difference between the Democritean and Epicurean philosophy of nature]. Marks K., Engels F. Sochineniya: v 50 t. [Marx K., Engels F. Works: in 50 vols]. Moscow: Politizdat Publ., vol. 40, pp. 147–233.
Martin Luther (2013). O svobode khristianina [On the freedom of a Christian]. Ufa: ARC Publ., 728 p.
Schultze-Kraft, M., Birman, D., Rusconi, M., Allefeld, C. et al. (2015). The point of no return in vetoing self-initiated movements. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Vol. 113, iss. 4, pp. 1080–1085. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1513569112
Mishura, A.S. (2019). [Freedom in the world: defense of externalist libertarianism]. Voprosy Filosofii. No. 8, pp. 49–58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31857/s004287440006032-0
Momjyan, K.Kh. (2017). [Socio-philosophical analysis of the phenomenon of free will]. Voprosy Filosofii. No. 9, pp. 68–81.
Stepin, V.S., Huseynov, A.A., Semigin, G.Yu. and Ogurtsov, A.P. (eds.) (2010). Novaya filosofskaya entsiklopediya: v 4 t. [New Philosophical Encyclopedia: in 4 vols]. Moscow: Mysl’ Publ., vol. 3, 694 p.
Parkhomenko, R.N. (2012). [The Genesis of the Idea of Freedom in Western European Philosophy]. Filosofskaya mysl’ [Philosophical Thought]. No. 4, pp. 179–210. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7256/23060174.2012.4.146
Parkhomenko, R.N. (2013). [The concept of the idea of freedom in ancient and medieval philosophy]. Filosofiya i kul’tura [Philosophy and Culture]. No. 5, pp. 701–708. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7256/19992793.2013.05.12
Sekatskaya, M.A. (2020). [Philosophical Significance of Free Will Research in Neuroscience on the Example of B. Libet’s Experimental Interpretations]. Voprosy Filosofii. No. 7, pp. 113‒123. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2020-7-113-123
Spinoza B. (1957). [Application containing metaphysical thoughts]. Spinoza B. Izbrannyye proizvedeniya: v 2 t. [Spinoza B. Selected works: in 2 vols]. Moscow: Politizdat Publ., vol. 1, pp. 265–316.
Thomas Aquinas (2002). Summa teologii. Ch. I: Voprosy 1–43 [Summa Theologiae. Pt. I. Questions 1–43]. Kyiv: Nika-Center Publ., Elga Publ., 560 p.
Yurasov, A.A. (2021). [What is the problem of free will?]. Kontekst i refleksiya: filosofiya o mire i cheloveke [Context and reflection: philosophy about the world and man]. Vol. 10, no. 2A, pp. 5–10.
Mele, A. (2014). Free: Why Science Hasn’t Disproved Free Will. New York: Oxford University Press, 112 p.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Perm University Herald. Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
