#39 Can We Control Our Destiny? Are We Bio Robots?

0:00 Free will has to have limits and boundaries. I mean, what are we pushing against? We're pushing against circumstances that structure reality. If there are no reality, they we'd be floating in space. There would be nothing to push or change. All right. Welcome to the New Age Human podcast. I'm your host, Jon Anastasio. And today we're talking with David Lawrence was the author of, are we really biochemical robots? Right? Are we spiritual beings? Are we just flesh? That's programmed. Um, so we discuss misconceptions around consciousness and free will, and at the very end stick around because we now insert quantum physics and that whole freewill debate all makes sense.

0:42 So that's gonna be really cool. if you have any questions, you can email me at jon@newagehuman.com. And then join the telegram channel, where we discuss topics mentioned in the show, and more importantly sharing what topics are of most interest to you. So with that said, let's get to the show. Thanks for listening. Let's go. welcome to the show, my friend. How's it going? Thank you. Thanks for inviting me. Yeah, we had a, a, a couple minutes before this and we were chatting and, um, if you see cats in the background, if you're watching this if you see cats in the background they look just like my one cat. So, be entertained if you wanna watch the video.

1:24 So let's get it to it. So you have a book, biochemical robots and, um, the conscious conversation around free will. that's an interesting topic because some people feel like and treat us like robots and we can't think ahead versus, you know what, you have all the choices in the world. So, what. Prompted you to start this book. What happened to you man? I picked up a book one day and it was by Sam Harris and it was called Free Will. And I picked it up because I liked his stuff and I liked him and I read all his books and so forth. But this one was like, whoa, this one doesn't work.

2:05 You know? And I, I, I intuitively didn't agree with the conclusions, didn't understand all the arguments, and that led to a sort of a journey to this cannot be, where's he coming from? And this is a guy I think is smart and I respect and seems very sincere. But that was the, uh, the curve ball. And it prompted me to, to do some research to write a short article. And that article was 20, 40 pages, but it became 60 to 80 pages. But it became, That's not a short article, man. well, no longer, it may be the longest short article that anyone's ever written. And that's what prompted it.

2:45 And then I got involved in the, the topic. I didn't realize at the time how important. The question is, it's just sort of an abstract question, but it's really the basis of everything we do and who we think we are. And if we don't have it, then we're completely victimless, I would say, victims to the forces in the universe utterly powerless. That's not a pretty picture, and so I said about to say, well, are the arguments for determinism really good? Are they sound? Are they persuasive? And well, so it's interesting because, um, it's, it's interesting to me that, and I'm sure this happens to a lot of people where you pick up a book and you're like, this is an interesting title.

3:27 Let me just read it. And then you're like, wait a minute. What are you doing? Like actually, you know, I don't think it happens that often cuz you read a book and you judge by the cover and you're like, I'm gonna, I'm gonna learn something from this. And you, you kind of weed it out in the library. Well, if you still go to the library, but you know, online or in Audible or whatever on Amazon. So it's interesting how you pick something up and you're like, let's see what's going on. And you're like, Nope, nope, that's it. I can't. I can't let this be, I have to write an article. Did you get any pushback? Like how, what was that like? I mean, did you, what was it like sharing that article? I'm, I'm curious. It never came out. It morphed into a Oh, I mean, it just, It was a cascade.

4:08 Right. You know, straight journey right there. And, uh, with a lot of research to get there, with a lot of surprises and a lot of twists along the way. So tell us about a surprise. What was something that you did on your search? Because it's obvious that, like you said, you, you, you skewed more towards which side do you skew to towards free will or yes, towards free will, although I'm not, I think it's largely unresolved, but I'm certainly in that direction. Okay. So, and, and, and trying to analyze and argue free will. What was something surprising? Because for me, I, I've always been like, you know what?

4:49 Free will all day. And randomly I would run into some people that are like, no your future is determined and you're just living that life. So, I mean, what, what, what surprised you? you, you know what you say to them. Here's what you say to them. I got an idea, suggestion. You say, well, okay, determinism maintains that all of everything that our thoughts, everything. We think, all of our actions, they're all determined. They're not within our control. They're caused by external forces. They're forced upon us, right? So I said that. So you're talking to that guy or gal and you say, So what you just said to me, then you were forced to say, and you were forced to believe not true by your own terms.

5:33 You don't believe that determinism is true because you went out and investigated and determined it was true, no pun intended. You were forced to believe it was true. So there's no truth in there. So And then, then if the guy says, no, no, no, no. Was it a guy or, I can't remember what you said, but whoever it is, if they say, no, no, you don't understand, it is true. I can tell you why. A, B, C, D, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom. And then my suggestion is you say, well, okay. But then again, if determinism maintains that all of our thoughts are beyond our control and they're put in our head and forced upon us, and we have no choice and we can't think otherwise.

6:16 Then you just gave me a whole bunch of thoughts that were put in your head that would bond or control and you believe them because you were caused to believe them, and you used all those thoughts to justify this other thought that was put in your head. That doesn't make any sense, but nothing among those were true because you were forced to to to believe them. So how am I supposed to believe anything you're saying at this point? Well, it, it, it when someone, in my opinion, when someone argues that there's no free will, then I immediately am thinking, well then, I see you as someone that allows themselves to be easily influenced.

6:56 You don't question things and so therefore you go on with your day thinking that everything is laid out for you and you don't have that rebel personality. And that's probably why I rarely run into somebody that thinks that way. Do you, like, for example, like where do you find somebody that believes in well, that does not believe in free will? Like how, how do you see that life playing out? Generally most scientists come from a materialist background True. and you know, believe the fundamental basis of the universe's material, physical, and that they're trained, I mean, sciences. Putting causal chains or links together, let's say between events and, and using those to predict things, mm.

7:44 links, similar links. So I think the scientific viewpoint is very amenable to that point of view, and a lot of it culturally comes from there. Do you feel like someone would have to be religious to believe in a free will? It's interesting. I, I don't, I don't, it's interesting cuz I don't, you can believe in free will regardless of religion. And vice versa in my circulating and talking to people, I have found generally, and this is not statistical enough to really be. Super meaningful, but I found that the, those who are religious, whether it's sort of a new age, spirituality or alternative non-denominational spirit or a traditional faith, are far more intuitively aligned with free will and than those not of faith.

8:39 And in, in a sense that makes sense because you have science. Causation, lack of free will and religion, spirituality, consciousness, purpose, and so forth. Mm. And. went into it with a misapprehension about that. I thought it would be the reverse. Well, let's say I thought that, that, that it would be the reverse for whatever reasons having to do with, if there's an almighty power, then you're subject to that almighty power. And what I wasn't taking into consideration is under most religions that Almighty power gave us free will. For various reasons. So that's what I've found. No scientific poll. But I think I, I think that's in general, I don't know that that's a big picture pattern, it's just what I've found.

9:25 Right, right. I will say that the only, the only I mean I say in the book, I mean, new media is just filled with people who are talking about determinism. People like Sam Harris, people like all of. Renowned physicists who give lectures and appear, the only one I know of, who, who, who has come out of that, of a caliber new media personal's come out for free will, has a spiritual religious bent. Again, not a scientific, statistical conclusion, but I do think there's some sort of a pattern that's appearing to me. Mm. So in But you don't have to. I mean, you don't have to be one way or the other. Yeah, of course. I mean, everybody has their free will to have their belief structure, ironically.

10:11 That's the other thing you might say to your, your friend who comes up to you. You might say, why are you telling me? Are you trying to persuade me that that's true? The termin is mist true? Well, how can you persuade anybody, if anything, if everything is predetermined? hmm. And the point being that no, there is no determinant. Nobody is a determinist. There are people who have a mental scheme in their head about that's how reality works. As they then decide the next thing they're gonna do and the next thing they're gonna do, and the next thing they're gonna do, and they affirm the, the, their free will every time they try and persuade somebody and change the course of the universe, which is not possible.

10:53 If, if they don't have, or if the world is determined. So I have a whole chapter on how determinants can't be determinists. They can't act like it, they can't go about their lives without every moment affirming that they have free will. That should be Uh, among, among some other, or, and I give some examples of, of things that determinants say, which you could only say if there were free will in the world. you give us an example? Oh. I could look one up. Sure there's a I don't need to look one up. A very famous evolutionary biologist has terrific lectures on genes and, you know, evolution and so forth says the following.

11:34 It's one of the quotes in the book. Everything we think is determined by the neural cascades in our brain. And show me a neuron that can just fire on its own without something prior, some prior neural activity. And then we can talk about free will. Okay. Then, I don't know, a minute or two later, someone asks him a question and he says, oh, now that doesn't mean that we should be letting criminals run around on the streets. Do harm to people. We have to protect society from them. Think of it as a a, a broken car or dangerous car, broken on the road. You're gonna take it off the road before it hurts somebody, fix it, put it back on the road, or retire it to the garage.

12:18 And so you can see the, the, the just blatant inconsistency. It's like, wait a second. Who is going to go put criminals off the street? If we don't control our actions? Who's gonna find them guilty? If we don't control our thoughts? Who exactly is gonna decide that that car should go into the garage to get fixed? And all this, everything. He, and, and, and by the way, there was sort of a moral imperative in theirs to do things that don't hurt people. You know, protect society from criminals and dangerous cars, uh, that are broken on the road. Okay. All of that presumes that you have free will, and it presumes there's a moral imperative to, to reduce harm.

13:00 None of that has to do with determinism. It, it, it, it violates every determinist principle. Hmm. I mean, it was two minutes later, but that's why I say that, that, that there, that there is, there are no determinists. They can't even talk like determinists. Without presuming that they have free will, that you're listening, that you can make judgements and maybe I can persuade you about something and change the course of the universe. I'm, so, I'm on. The funny thing is I'm on the same side as you and I'm trying to figure out and maybe someone listening is trying to figure out who, who, yeah. Was that Zephyr? That's Zephyr Except fors loud, Zephyr from Turkey. international cat on, on air.

13:42 Don't blame me for that interruption. It was determined I had right, right. It was all planned. It was gonna happen. It was gonna happen. I'm trying to remember what I was gonna say, but oh yeah. So the funny thing is, I, I'm, I am on the same side side as you and I. Maybe, maybe I don't get out as much, but I, I rarely run into somebody that is like a determinist. And maybe because I, my circles are, you know, the ones that I've built over time. But, um, what are some like misconceptions that people have about consciousness and free will that are skewing towards the, the, the determinist side? I'm, I'm curious How much time do we right.

14:25 one of them is that free will, has to be absolute if you don't control everything, you control nothing. And Harris has a quote in his book that says, what would it take to have free will? I'm paraphrasing a bit. You would have to know about and control everything that determines us. Biology, physiology, genetics, parents, birth circumstances, everything. Mm. that's a, that, that's a pretty stupendous misconception, I think was the word you were asking for. I mean it, what it does is it confuses influence with control. Things can influence us without controlling us or determining us.

15:08 You know, our body can be a, a biological platform for the operation of consciousness. Mm-hmm. I, if it isn't, you're presuming what you're trying to prove, which is that we're determined, but there's no logical reason why. Why genetics? Your body where you were born aren't conditions or circumstances in which your free will operates. And the misconception is that free will has to be absolute and it's just the opposite. Free will has to have limits and boundaries. I mean, what are we pushing against? We're pushing against circumstances that structure reality. If there are no reality, they we'd be floating in space.

15:49 There would be nothing to push or change. So, there's this very odd misconception that, that, that everything that influences us, us controls us and no distinction is made. We have to control everything or control nothing really. So, I, I didn't choose my parents, but I can't talk back to them. I can't become an obstreperous child while my brother is the good boy, you know, who always gets the, the goodies, you know, I mean, It, it's just So that's one, that's Yeah, that's one. You want another, you want another 50? We could, let's, let's do one more and then I got a, I got a, a question that keeps popping up in my head.

16:32 I, I want to give it, uh, it's it's, it's determined to ask you. So, go ahead, go on your go, go on The second misconception, I'm curious. Well, another biggie is that that science. Has confirmed that the world is determined. There's a physicist who did a a video. She's really terrific and does a lot of great videos, but on the one on free will, she says and I think I quoted this one too. It was a good one. If you deny that the world is determined, you are going against science. You are going against science. Wow. So sci So the question is resolved, right? Science is determined.

17:13 Well, I did a fair amount of research on that because that's not just her claim. And, and Harris makes similar claims about tests that, that, that, that's alleged to approve this. But the reality is, at the end of the day, uh, the quantum science is consists of a number of different and conflicting theories. There is no one theory. And that's why it's, it's, it, it, it's the meaning in what it says about reality is constantly debated and obscure. But at the end of the day, of the top half dozen theories, three of them are quail endorsing a deterministic universe where free will isn't possible, and another two or three are probabilistic, which allows the possibility for free will.

17:57 So it's completely split and it's not like there's any. Con a controversy that the top 4, 5, 6 positions, you can put'em out in they're half and half or roughly, depending on which one you think goes into that top group. Science has not made any determination, again, no pun intended, but it's tough not to avoid that word in this conversations Right. that, that that determinism is true. So these claims that science has proven determinism is true, is nonsense. What she's really saying. But implying something different is that her selected version interpretation of science has endorsed free will.

18:37 Well, okay, but you're not going against science. You're going against her interpretation, but that morphs into you're going against science. So it took me a long time to learn that those top theories were really split. It's really a split vote. The jury is split. There's no conviction No and no resolution. ma, no one can agree. What. Sure. Well, what I was gonna say is, when she made that statement, it was funny thing kind of bouncing into the frame. Yeah, yeah. If you're watching, there's like a tail just whipping around. It's funny. so yeah, if there's any cat lovers, watch the video on YouTube. Like, you're, you're gonna enjoy Well, where's yours?

19:18 I think I'm, I'm showing mine. Where's yours? Yeah, right. My cat, she is passed out on the bed in the other room and, if there's just me here, you would hear scratching on the wall and like meowing. But my wife is doing her thing and so the cat doesn't need to be around us, but as long as there's someone to bother that's within reach, she's good. And she's a cuddler. So, I, we give her. The free will of where she wants to hang out in the house minus the office, because if she bites a plant it's almost like she's determined to get sick.

19:58 So, I, I used some, some words in there if it wasn't obvious. But it's interesting going back to what that doctor said, that you know, it, it, if you don't believe in determinism you go against science. And I'm like, science is not about finding, it's finding answers and questioning, constantly questioning, constantly testing. It's ever evolving. Once you get into that mindset of the, of, of there being a limitation. Like, Hey, we figured everything out. That's your downfall because that's it. You, you've limited yourself. And if there's anything that's that goes on forever that's unchanging is like everything changes.

20:38 Nothing stays this the same. And so it, it's. For that same reason, you have to continue to research. And we've, we're, we're always questioning ourselves. We would've still thought a lot of things like the moon was made outta cheese and if you know enough doctors, doctors, scientists thought that way. Then, uh, we, we would be craving some moon cheese right now, but, so you kind of dove into you mentioned that, that quantum realm, quantum physics. I'm curious, are you familiar with the double slit experiment? Yeah, of course. It's the heart of, it's the heart of the, uh, please, should, uh, It's the heart of the thing.

21:20 The wave particle dwelling thing. Please share what. being articulate? It's part of the What is it? What is, please Oh, what is it? double slit experiment is. Sure. It was the popular, well known central demonstration that for some crazy reason that nobody understand. Matter behaves like a wave and a particle, which in, in their definitions are conflicting under Newtonian science waves fan out and spread. And, and particles are point, like, and concentrated and have determinate positions and it's one or the other. But in the double slit experiment, they, they would shoot, they shoot particles okay.

22:06 At the double slits. And if nobody's looking. Which is another crazy thing that we'll get to the next level. The particles land on a back screen in wave patterns. There's alternating bands of density that shows that what went through those slits is a wave. Okay. But if you watch what's going on, right, and you, you watch and you track, you put monitors, watch what the particles, the paths are taking. They don't land as waves. Now suddenly they're par two clumps of particles on the back screen. Okay, so what the hell is matter? And how can particles, when you're not looking suddenly become waves Yeah, the pr pretty freaky.

22:52 And the other, the other sort of startling thing is how could looking, how could monitoring, how could observation, Affect what anything does. There's no physical contact. It's just ethereal. There's no, it, it, it's, it's, and, and today, you know, it's what, a hundred years after quantum science started going in, in 1905 or thereabouts, depending on how you count the beginning. Nobody knows the answer to this. And those, those five or six theories that I was talking about, they all have different ideas. On one of'em. There are both particles and waves, but we don't know exactly how the waves are piloting the particles. And another one, it's all waves, another one, it's all particles.

23:34 It's it, it's a complete mystery. And, and so puzzling, I mean, so that was the basic demonstration of wave particle duality. What does matter? How can it be a wave and a particle? And what's causing the transition between the two? Mm-hmm. observation? Is it something else? Makes no sense. it's like it's Almost ungraspable because there are infinite possibilities and you're trying it, I feel like you're trying to grasp that air, right? And it's not meant to be grasped that, like the concept Mm-hmm. on itself and inside out, which I love because I love freaky dey, stuff like that.

24:18 So I'm glad that we nationally went that direction. here's one other. Let me give you one other freaky flip to it cuz there's various permutations that are, that are even crazier. One that comes to mind is that after the particles go through the slip, they can put something that monitors not, but afterwards. And that changes whether they're gonna land as a particle or wave. If they put in monitor Now, At the slits, waves have to be created. They interfere with each other and they overlap, and the peaks and the troughs cancel each other. And the peaks. And the peaks, and that's how you get those alternating bands. So what went through the slits? If afterwards you can do something to alter the outcome?

25:04 Well, something had to happen at the slits if they were gonna land as waves Logically. But nothing, nothing happens at that. Those slits that can't be changed by by something thereafter makes no sense. Retroactively. It's like retroactively. That's just, that's just a sort of a metaphor. I don't think that's a theory of anyone's, but in any case, that's pretty strange. Yeah, it's a, And Wave article duality is sort of the, the sort of central conundrum in quantum science. I think that. Richard Feinman, famous physicist said that it's the heart of quantum science. mm mm Yeah.

25:45 The, um, the fact that duality can exist where one particle. Will act like one particle when an observer that believes in one particle and then once the observer is gone, the particle can go back to doing what it was doing, which was what I call freaky deaky. And it is it, it is one particle. It's no particle. It's two particles all at once, and it's creating that wave pattern, which is insane. So it's, that is like how you can start to explain. That there are infinite possibilities and, um, yeah. Yeah, I know that, um, you wanted to I know that Well anyways, I think we can end on that because that was a, a good closing concept could be that is Can I, a, an awesome teaser for anybody who wants to get into this, this conversation.

26:38 So, can I tie it back to free will or we, um, tie it back my no. Okay. All right. Because, uh, we gotta complete the circle, the, the relevance to the free will debate and especially entanglement. That's another quantum phenomena that everybody has sort of ard about. The idea that you do something here and 18,000 universes away, galaxies away, it doesn't matter. Something happens over there. And, and it, it introduced the concept of non-physical, non-local influence. Nobody knows what it is, how it works, but under Newtonian science, before quantum science influence was physical, it was local. You had to have contact, transfer of energy.

27:19 Now you've got a phenomenon where you do something here and 18 galaxies away. Something instantly happens over there, instantly fascia than the speed of light. Which is the limit that special relativity puts on things. It's, it's completely a conundrum. But all these things point to one thing, which is that determinism is based on mechanical causation of event after event, after event, linked in a causal chain by a necessary connection, action. Quantum science, the double slit experiment, the entanglement is saying something else is going on in the universe. We don't know what the hell it is and we don't know the mechanism by which it's accomplished.

27:59 Now, that doesn't prove free will, but it proves that the conditions are are there for the possibility of free will, which wouldn't be there under Newtonian causation, where it's a causal chain, it cannot be interrupted. Now you got non-physical influence. Now, free will, if it exists, would have to be something non-physical. Influencing the physical. It can't be physical influence because one of the two players in the game. So you see it opens up the whole possibilities of free will by saying that causation isn't the only game in town and it may not be the the game at all as I give some other arguments in in the book.

28:42 Mm. Okay. Now that makes sense. It all ties into opening up a very rigid mechanical viewpoint to a whole nother world of possibilities. Yeah, and I think, uh, that's a very good point to make an a, a good topic for anybody. To contemplate on when considering possibilities for themselves. And it can be inspirational to know another reason why you should change your situation and how you can change your change and, and how you can change your situation, right? It's not all, everybody in my situation ends up like this. It's like, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. If you think that way, you will bring it that way.

29:24 We literally just broke down the science that. Breaks the laws, all laws. So you, if, if, if everything that you look at says it's determined to be that way, well, we just gave you the science. And if you need to listen to that part again, listen to the whole thing again, share it with a friend. You're not a biochemical robot. You're not a robot. You know, there's no danger will Robinson. There is no danger. All right. So let's, uh, let's tell everybody how they can find you, David. They got your book. What's the best way to reach you and find out more information about you? The website is biochemical robots.com. There's an email, a portion of it.

30:06 You can email me, I'll write back, talk about whatever you'd like to talk about. I answer them all. And the Twitter and Instagram presence is found just by searching biochemical robots, and it will, it'll pop up. And that information will be in the show notes, so don't worry about that, David. Thank you for coming onto the show. Awesome conversation. And everybody check out his book, man. All right. Have a good one, my friend. Hey, thanks, you too.