Freedom in Nature

TL;DR

This paper proposes a physics-inspired concept of relative freedom to address free will, suggesting it is observable in nature and linked to consciousness, thus reducing metaphysical assumptions.

Contribution

It introduces the idea of relative freedom from physics and biology, defining free will as a conscious form of this observable phenomenon.

Findings

Relative freedom is observable in nature.

Biological processes utilize trial and error with inherent freedom.

Consciousness may be linked to communicability as a criterion.

Abstract

The paper starts with the proposal that the cause of the apparent insolubility of the free-will problem are several popular but strongly metaphysical notions and hypotheses. To reduce the metaphysics, some ideas are borrowed from physics. A concept of event causality is discussed. The importance of Hume's Principle of Causality is stressed and his Principle of Causation is weakened. The key concept of the paper, the so-called relative freedom, is also suggested by physics. It is a kind of freedom that can be observed everywhere in nature. Turning to biology, incomplete knowledge is defined for all organisms. They cope with the problem by Popper's trial and error processes. One source of their success is the relative freedom of choice from the basic option ranges: mutations, motions and neural connections. Finally, the conjecture is adopted that communicability can be used as a criterion of consciousness and free will is defined as a conscious version of relative freedom. The resulting notion is logically self-consistent and it describes an observable phenomenon that agrees with our experience.