All Episodes
Previous Next
July 28, 2025 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
05:37
On Free Will and Life
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
All right.
So, because I said emergent properties, right?
So, the wolf has an emergent property called life that is possessed by none of its individual atoms, right?
Yes, that seems to be the case.
I'm sorry, seems to if the wolf is alive, but none of its individual atoms are alive, then the wolf has an emergent property called life possessed by none of its individual atoms.
Yes.
Okay.
In the same way, you get enough matter together, it collapses enough, you get a black hole where light can't escape its surface, and it's crossed over, right?
There's an emergent property called black hole, right?
So none of our individual atoms within our brain can think, right?
That definitely seems to be the case.
I would agree.
Seems to be?
Well, I've never been an atom, so I don't think that.
Come on, come on.
Let's not be clever and hedge.
Can any individual atom think?
I don't believe they can.
No.
You think it's possible that they could?
It's possible.
It's not possible.
No individual atom can think any more than any individual carbon atom can possess the property called life.
And we know that to be a case because there are almost countless amounts of carbon atoms in the world that are not alive or part of any life form.
Oh, sorry, not alive.
They're not part of any life form.
So carbon atoms can exist in the absence of life.
Carbon atoms are required for life, but carbon atoms themselves are not alive.
But animals largely composed of carbon atoms can be alive, right?
So carbon atoms individually do not contain the property of life.
Atoms within our brain do not contain the property or capacity for thought.
An individual neuron, can it think or not?
One individual neuron.
No.
Agreed.
Right.
And two neurons can't think and five neurons and a million neurons.
At some point, you get the emergent property called consciousness, right?
On your view, yes.
Well, no.
On the material view.
Right.
Okay.
So an aggregation of atoms and neurons can possess a quality that none of them possess individually, but in aggregate, in the same way that an aggregation of carbon atoms and other things can produce something called life that is possessed by neither, that is possessed by no individual carbon atom.
So the fact that individual atoms and neurons can't think does not mean that there's not an emergent property called consciousness and thought when you put enough of them together in the right way.
Well, I'm not saying that there's no consciousness.
What I'm debating is whether or not we would have free will or real rationality.
Well, you can't deny the capacity for free will based upon material terms because we've already accepted that there are emergent properties.
No individual atom can make a choice.
Is that fair to say?
Absolutely.
Okay.
No individual neuron can make a choice.
Okay.
But you put enough of them together and the possibility of free will emerges in the same way that the possibility of consciousness and life emerges.
Okay.
Just to be clear, would you agree with me that just because something can emerge, that doesn't mean that anything can emerge.
Is that right?
Is that true?
Like, it doesn't follow that because you put a bunch of atoms together and you get a wolf, that therefore if you put a bunch of atoms together, you could get like an angel or I don't know, just whatever you name it.
Well, you can't get a square circle.
Yeah, you can't get a square circle.
Yeah, you can't get a square circle.
Like, just because something just because some things emerge, that doesn't mean that anything can emerge.
Is that true?
Is that fair?
Yeah, of course.
However, when we see something emerge repeatedly, we have to accept that it can emerge.
So, for instance, we see life emerging repeatedly from the right combination of atoms and cells.
We see thought emerging continually from the right combination of atoms and neurons.
And therefore, and we see and assume and accept free will all over the place.
And we see people making choices.
We make choices ourselves.
And so if we can't, so I'm not saying that we can have giant invisible spiders erupt from our eyeballs because we have eyeballs, because we don't see any of that.
And it's a self-contradictory thing.
But when we see and accept and experience free will on a continual basis, then we have every reason to believe that it is an emergent property because we see it everywhere.
And of course, to argue with somebody assumes that they have the capacity to change their mind.
And therefore, we are assuming that somebody has to change mind.
Now, of course, I understand that you say, I think, if I'm wrong, of course, correct me.
But I think you're saying that, Steph, you have the capacity to change your mind because you have an immaterial essence called the soul that transcends mere matter and therefore evades or escapes the restrictions of the domino effect of cause and effect that matter is subject to.
Yeah, I would say that's very accurate.
Right.
Now, the problem is that you have no proof for this immaterial essence, and this immaterial essence is self-contradictory because you're saying it's consciousness or the ability to will with no physical cause and no physical manifestation and no way of finding it, whether it exists at all in the world in the way that it is.
So what I would say is that we see countless emergent properties around the world, in nature and, of course, in the universe, we see countless emergent properties.
▲
Export Selection