Separating concepts is itself a moral action. Moral actions should relate to moral agents. Most of the moral agents who use these concepts aren’t here on lesswrong. They include the kind of people who hear ″free will is an illusion″ from a subjectively credible source and mope around for the rest of their lives.
“What happens then when agents’ self-efficacy is undermined? It is not that their basic desires and drives are defeated. It is rather, I suggest, that they become skeptical that they can control those desires; and in the face of that skepticism, they fail to apply the effort that is needed even to try. If they were tempted to behave badly, then coming to believe in fatalism makes them less likely to resist that temptation.
“
”
—Richard Holton[210]
Baumeister and colleagues found that provoking disbelief in free will seems to cause various negative effects. The authors concluded, in their paper, that it is belief in determinism that causes those negative effects.[205] This may not be a very justified conclusion, however.[210] First of all, free will can at least refer to either libertarian (indeterministic) free will or compatibilistic (deterministic) free will. Having participants read articles that simply “disprove free will” is unlikely to increase their understanding of determinism, or the compatibilistic free will that it still permits.[210]
In other words, “provoking disbelief in free will” probably causes a belief in fatalism. As discussed earlier in this article, compatibilistic free will is illustrated by statements like “my choices have causes, and an effect – so I affect my future”, whereas fatalism is more like “my choices have causes, but no effect – I am powerless”. Fatalism, then, may be what threatens people’s sense of self-efficacy. Lay people should not confuse fatalism with determinism, and yet even professional philosophers occasionally confuse the two. It is thus likely that the negative consequences below can be accounted for by participants developing a belief in fatalism when experiments attack belief in “free will”.[210] To test the effects of belief in determinism, future studies would need to provide articles that do not simply “attack free will”, but instead focus on explaining determinism and compatibilism. Some studies have been conducted indicating that people react strongly to the way in which mental determinism is described, when reconciling it with moral responsibility. Eddy Nahmias has noted that when peoples actions are framed with respect to their beliefs and desires (rather than their neurological underpinnings) they are more likely to dissociate determinism from moral responsibility.[211]
Various social behavioural traits have been correlated with the belief in deterministic models of mind, some of which involved the experimental subjection of individuals to libertarian and deterministic perspectives.
After researchers provoked volunteers to disbelieve in free will, participants lied, cheated, and stole more. Kathleen Vohs has found that those whose belief in free will had been eroded were more likely to cheat.[212] In a study conducted by Roy Baumeister, after participants read an article arguing against free will, they were more likely to lie about their performance on a test where they would be rewarded with cash.[213] Provoking a rejection of free will has also been associated with increased aggression and less helpful behaviour[214][215] as well as mindless conformity.[216] Disbelief in free will can even cause people to feel less guilt about transgressions against others.[217]
Baumeister and colleagues also note that volunteers disbelieving in free will are less capable of counterfactual thinking.[205][218] This is worrying because counterfactual thinking (“If I had done something different…”) is an important part of learning from one’s choices, including those that harmed others.[219] Again, this cannot be taken to mean that belief in determinism is to blame; these are the results we would expect from increasing people’s belief in fatalism.[210]
Along similar lines, Tyler Stillman has found that belief in free will predicts better job performance.[220]”
Separating concepts is itself a moral action. Moral actions should relate to moral agents. Most of the moral agents who use these concepts aren’t here on lesswrong. They include the kind of people who hear ″free will is an illusion″ from a subjectively credible source and mope around for the rest of their lives.
“What happens then when agents’ self-efficacy is undermined? It is not that their basic desires and drives are defeated. It is rather, I suggest, that they become skeptical that they can control those desires; and in the face of that skepticism, they fail to apply the effort that is needed even to try. If they were tempted to behave badly, then coming to believe in fatalism makes them less likely to resist that temptation.
“
”
—Richard Holton[210]
Baumeister and colleagues found that provoking disbelief in free will seems to cause various negative effects. The authors concluded, in their paper, that it is belief in determinism that causes those negative effects.[205] This may not be a very justified conclusion, however.[210] First of all, free will can at least refer to either libertarian (indeterministic) free will or compatibilistic (deterministic) free will. Having participants read articles that simply “disprove free will” is unlikely to increase their understanding of determinism, or the compatibilistic free will that it still permits.[210]
In other words, “provoking disbelief in free will” probably causes a belief in fatalism. As discussed earlier in this article, compatibilistic free will is illustrated by statements like “my choices have causes, and an effect – so I affect my future”, whereas fatalism is more like “my choices have causes, but no effect – I am powerless”. Fatalism, then, may be what threatens people’s sense of self-efficacy. Lay people should not confuse fatalism with determinism, and yet even professional philosophers occasionally confuse the two. It is thus likely that the negative consequences below can be accounted for by participants developing a belief in fatalism when experiments attack belief in “free will”.[210] To test the effects of belief in determinism, future studies would need to provide articles that do not simply “attack free will”, but instead focus on explaining determinism and compatibilism. Some studies have been conducted indicating that people react strongly to the way in which mental determinism is described, when reconciling it with moral responsibility. Eddy Nahmias has noted that when peoples actions are framed with respect to their beliefs and desires (rather than their neurological underpinnings) they are more likely to dissociate determinism from moral responsibility.[211]
Various social behavioural traits have been correlated with the belief in deterministic models of mind, some of which involved the experimental subjection of individuals to libertarian and deterministic perspectives.
After researchers provoked volunteers to disbelieve in free will, participants lied, cheated, and stole more. Kathleen Vohs has found that those whose belief in free will had been eroded were more likely to cheat.[212] In a study conducted by Roy Baumeister, after participants read an article arguing against free will, they were more likely to lie about their performance on a test where they would be rewarded with cash.[213] Provoking a rejection of free will has also been associated with increased aggression and less helpful behaviour[214][215] as well as mindless conformity.[216] Disbelief in free will can even cause people to feel less guilt about transgressions against others.[217]
Baumeister and colleagues also note that volunteers disbelieving in free will are less capable of counterfactual thinking.[205][218] This is worrying because counterfactual thinking (“If I had done something different…”) is an important part of learning from one’s choices, including those that harmed others.[219] Again, this cannot be taken to mean that belief in determinism is to blame; these are the results we would expect from increasing people’s belief in fatalism.[210]
Along similar lines, Tyler Stillman has found that belief in free will predicts better job performance.[220]”