I have naturally believed in human free will, the freedom to make choices. I don’t remember having learned this concept or having it force-fed to me. I have never tried to argue the point or understand it in a deep philosophical way; the concept has merely been an assumed one. In the same way, I have assumed the force of gravity keeps me from floating away. So when I came across Einstein’s belief that there is no free will, I thought I had better think more seriously about what I believe, because Albert Einstein was an extremely intelligent man.
There is a website entitled “The Cry,” with the following statement: “There is no freedom of will or separate soul.” Three quotations from Einstein follow:
In human freedom in the philosophical sense I am definitely a disbeliever. Everybody acts not only under external compulsion but also in accordance with inner necessity. [The World As I See It]
But the scientist is possessed by the sense of universal causation. The future, to him, is every whit as necessary and determined as the past. There is nothing divine about morality, it is a purely human affair. [The World As I See It]
Since our inner experiences consist of reproductions and combinations of sensory impressions, the concept of a soul without a body seems to me to be empty and devoid of meaning. [Letter of 5 February 1921]
A more extensive quote from Einstein’s The World As I See It reads:
“In human freedom in the philosophical sense I am definitely a disbeliever. Everybody acts not only under external compulsion but also in accordance with inner necessity. Schopenhauer's saying, that ‘a man can do as he will, but not will as he will,’ has been an inspiration to me since my youth up, and a continual consolation and unfailing well-spring of patience in the face of the hardships of life, my own and others'. This feeling mercifully mitigates the sense of responsibility which so easily becomes paralyzing, and it prevents us from taking ourselves and other people too seriously; it conduces to a view of life in which humour, above all, has its due place.”
Einstein says: “Everybody acts not only under external compulsion but also in accordance with inner necessity.” According to constructive mindset theory, it is consistent to align “the external compulsion” with a person’s sense of justice. You become aware of an injustice (the external event). The compulsion consists of your emotional response which leads to motivation to do something about the external event (anger and management). To be happy is believed by many to be the purpose of life. Could this purpose be what Einstein refers to as the “inner necessity”? If so, then it follows that a concept of justice compels the individual to act in such a matter to enhance his/her happiness, the external in accordance with the internal.
The scenario becomes one of conditional living. Our emotions are understood to be conditioned to respond to justice and our behaviours are understood to be conditioned to enhance happiness. When life gets reduced to such a conditional view, it becomes easy to conclude that man does not have free will. Our responses and actions may become predictable if the nature of man is assumed to be within the above conditional constraints.
When life is viewed within a conditional framework, it follows that the understanding of psychology becomes limited to existing within the formation of the destructive mindset. If I respond to the external stimulus of an injustice within the power-based, me-versus-you, destructive mindset, then my actions are conditional on the stimulus and separated from a relational component with the person who is linked with the injustice. I become constrained to act in a manner so as to achieve my understanding of what makes me happy, using whatever power I believe I have to get there.
Einstein claims his inspiration comes from Schopenhauer, who says: “a man can do as he will, but not will as he will.” What does this statement mean? A man can act according to his will – which makes sense; but he cannot will according to his will – is this true?
Einstein also says: “Since our inner experiences consist of reproductions and combinations of sensory impressions, the concept of a soul without a body seems to me to be empty and devoid of meaning.” The way I understand life, the “soul” consists of thoughts, emotions, memories, etc. I like to think of it in terms of a computer. The hardware represents the body, and the cyberspace that is created by the interaction of hardware and software is like the soul. In this sense I am in agreement with Einstein that a body and a soul go together. I do, however, find a third component to human reality, one which I call “spirit”. It is a dynamic reality, the social/relational component. We find ourselves in relationship with someone or something. As is pointed out in the YouTube presentation of “The Bod Delusion,” the relational component is what is studied in the social sciences.
It is in the context of relationship that humans exert free will. The evidence of free will is love. In the context of relationship we make choices that impact our actions. Do we proceed with actions that are according to a relationship with the self (choose your will), or do we proceed with actions that are according to a relationship with the other (choose the will of the other)? It appears that man can choose amongst wills to act on or follow, which is to “will as he will.”
If you consistently behave in a manner that is according to your own will, you will be seen as selfish. If you consistently behave in a manner that is according to the will of the other, you will be seen to be in slavery. You are free to balance your choices, to act according to your own will versus to act according to the will of the other. Your choice is to balance loving yourself and loving the other. Is the freedom to contemplate such a choice not an example of: “will as he will”? Is this not free will?
The storyline of the movie Rain Man is an example of what I am talking about. A man who behaves according to his own selfish desires at the expense of others learns to behave in a way that balances his needs with the needs of others. He becomes free to alter his will because of the loving relationship he forms with his brother. The storyline of the movie Thor also shows the transition of the selfish actions of the superhero to actions that take others into account. To achieve a greater happiness or a greater good in the context of relationship is what one lives for. Such actions are not necessarily predictable.
It follows that the purpose of life is not happiness. Rather, the purpose of life is about relationship. The external compulsion and the inner necessity are understood as social characteristics. Injustice is viewed as a breach of relationship and the person seeks to hear and be heard in order to enhance unity, the food of healthy relationship. The constructive mindset acknowledges relationship and the role of love. An understanding of life is not limited within a conditional framework; rather, the unconditional and unpredictable bursts onto the scene. Responsibility is not seen as paralyzing; rather, it is embraced as a means to achieve happiness. Responsibility implies relationship. The constructive mindset enhances unity and fulfillment in life. The reality of a separate spirit, the social/relational component to humanness, is where free will is understood. Free will liberates us to find the path to healthy relationships. Healthy relationship is the purpose of life; happiness is a benefit.