**Sam Harris, Ben Shapiro and Eric Weinstein - Free will debate — Transcript & Summary | SozAI** Source: https://sozai.app/transcript/sam-harris-ben-shapiro-eric-weinstein-free-will-debate/ A deep debate on free will featuring Sam Harris, Ben Shapiro, and Eric Weinstein exploring scientific materialism, morality, and human behavior. ## Key Takeaways - Free will is questioned as an illusion within a scientific materialist framework. - Moral insights can arise from understanding the lack of free will. - Human cognition includes non-factual intuitions that influence decisions beyond pure rationality. - Scientific knowledge is provisional and subject to revision with deeper inquiry. - Responsibility and behavior remain important even if free will is denied. ## What the video covers - The discussion opens with the scientific materialist worldview, portraying humans as biological entities without true control over behavior. - Participants debate the existence and illusion of free will, with moral implications considered when free will is seen as an illusion. - Ben Shapiro's religious identity and its influence on his arguments are humorously examined, highlighting the interplay of faith and atheism. - The conversation explores how rational minds grapple with pre-existing mental architectures that mimic religious functions. - They discuss the limitations of scientific understanding and the role of intuition, emotions, and non-factual mental phenomena in informing life decisions. - The debate touches on the nature of objective reality, mathematical proof, and the evolving understanding of facts through deeper scientific inquiry. - The concept of free will is challenged by the idea that individuals are part of a system of influences beyond their control. - The layered complexity of reality is illustrated, from quantum physics to morality, emphasizing the difficulty of deriving free will from fundamental science. - The speakers consider practical implications of rejecting free will, especially regarding responsibility and behavior in society. - The dialogue includes reflections on personal effort, belief formation, and the tension between scientific rationalism and human experience. ## Chapters 1. 00:00 Scientific Materialism and Free Will 2. 01:54 Rational Minds and Pre-existing Architectures 3. 03:45 Intuition, Utility, and Non-factual Mental Phenomena 4. 05:25 Mathematical Proof and Objective Reality 5. 07:04 Limits of Proof and Scientific Understanding 6. 08:41 Free Will as a Mockery in a System of Influences 7. 10:04 Layers of Reality from Physics to Morality 8. 15:17 Practical Implications of Free Will Denial Answers ## Questions about this video What is the main argument about free will in this debate? The debate argues that free will is likely an illusion within a scientific materialist worldview, where human behavior is determined by biological and environmental factors beyond individual control. How do the speakers view the relationship between science and morality? They suggest that understanding the illusion of free will can lead to new moral insights, but also acknowledge that scientific rationalism alone may not fully satisfy human needs for meaning and ethical guidance. What role do intuition and non-factual mental phenomena play according to the discussion? Intuitions and mental experiences that are not strictly factual influence human decision-making and feelings like guilt or superstition, highlighting complexities beyond pure scientific facts. ## Full Transcript — Download SRT & Markdown 00:00 Speaker A Let's take the scientific materialist worldview at its very base, okay? At its very base, we're basically balls of meat wandering through the universe with a bit of self-awareness attached, or sort of spineless stones that have been thrown. And we know that we've been thrown. We don't have control over our own behavior. We don't have control over what we do. We don't have the capacity to react. 00:10 Speaker A thrown we don't have control over our own behavior we don't have control over what we do we don't have the capacity to react no first of all many people who would take an evolutionary picture of ourselves also imagine that we have free 00:21 Speaker A No, first of all, many people who would take an evolutionary picture of ourselves also imagine that we have free will. I've never understood that perspective, to be honest, at all. I'll put the free will piece in play here because I actually think there are moral insights we can have when we see through the illusion of free will, which we really can't easily have without doing that. 00:33 Speaker A really can't easily have without doing that and then I want to bring you in here Eric [Laughter] part of the problems one of the problems is that in some very weird way because Ben is wearing a kippah we think of him 00:54 Speaker A And then I want to bring you in here, Eric. [Laughter] Part of the problem, one of the problems, is that in some very weird way, because Ben is wearing a kippah, we think of him as being very Orthodox, pious, and religious. In fact, I'm always struck by just how much he has chosen any appeal to text in public arguments for functional reasons. I very often see him in a largely atheistic context. 01:11 Speaker A Sam that you're always focused on what is to my way of thinking very clearly a form of Judaism expresses atheism that [Laughter] really does sound anti-semitic somehow I'm gonna have to ask my rabbi how I just got insulted and I said how much is 01:32 Speaker A I find, Sam, that you're always focused on what is, to my way of thinking, very clearly a form of Judaism expresses atheism. That [Laughter] really does sound anti-Semitic somehow. I'm gonna have to ask my rabbi how I just got insulted, and I said, how much is being paid tonight? 01:54 Speaker A rational systems I think that they is an odd is a good distinction I think a lot of this has to do with pre-existing architecture that predisposes us even though our rational minds may know better towards something that functions very much in as if 02:11 Speaker A You know, as much as I take a scientific worldview, I find that if I'm really honest with myself, I have a lot of certainly dialectical tensions that I can't resolve, needs for meaning that I can't find easily met within the rational systems. I think that there is an odd, is a good distinction. I think a lot of this has to do with pre-existing architecture that predisposes us, even though our rational minds may know better, towards something that functions very much in, as if religious context. 02:29 Speaker A lives and all of the mechanisms that would determine one path over another a complete understanding of the mind and the cosmos that's all that's all it is all the is there that is there to be understood if understanding that 02:44 Speaker A Well, cystic is an odd first eye because here's one way those two things collapse for me: if understanding how the universe is all together, you know, all the possibilities of experience, all the ways minds emerge, all of the kinds of good lives and bad lives, and all of the mechanisms that would determine one path over another, a complete understanding of the mind and the cosmos, that's all, that's all it is. All there is, there is to be understood. 02:59 Speaker A well what what else is there to inform your life well there are these things that we notice in our minds that we can you know that run through our fingers like Quicksilver that aren't exactly facts these intuitions these things that 03:15 Speaker A If understanding that couldn't give you a complete picture of what you ought to do, where would you go to get that picture? If you sum all the facts, how does that not give you a way to chart your course in this universe? 03:30 Speaker A can be fulfilled there are all these different ways of tagging utilities this utilities and if you just notice your mind you'll notice there all sorts of things going on in it that really aren't about aren't about facts and I don't know 03:45 Speaker A Well, what else is there to inform your life? Well, there are these things that we notice in our minds that we can, you know, that run through our fingers like Quicksilver that aren't exactly facts. These intuitions, these things that not us, even though we know the answer, we feel superstitious, we feel guilty. You know, how the economy's talking about utility is a one-dimensional object, but how many kinds of utility and disutility? I could be happy, I can be interested, I can be fulfilled. There are all these different ways of tagging utilities, this utilities. 03:58 Speaker A reality when you were having that conversation [Laughter] reality but I think that a lot of what goes on is that we've been in the shallow end of science where more or less you know me and let's say this 04:18 Speaker A And if you just notice your mind, you'll notice there are all sorts of things going on in it that really aren't about facts, and I don't know where they originate. Neither do you. But just translate what you're saying. How I'm hearing what you're saying, you're telling me facts about the mind, which I agree with. This kind of a Congress and guys decided that there was an objective reality when you were having that conversation. [Laughter] Reality. 04:33 Speaker A the literature for years and we think it's proved but it turns out we didn't have the right proof you know so we have situations in which we've been picking low-hanging easy fruit to console ourselves that we we can all get at the 04:47 Speaker A But I think that a lot of what goes on is that we've been in the shallow end of science where more or less, you know, me and let's say this gentleman over here share enough that we can probably agree that the square root of two is provably irrational. I believe that that's probably in a, but I don't believe proof checking is objective because we have things like the ABC problem. It's in the literature for years, and we think it's proved, but it turns out we didn't have the right proof. 05:00 Speaker A thought we knew what we were talking about and then we find out at a deeper level that we didn't and then we think we know what we're talking about again and then it can reverse again but that moved to the deeper level is more facts 05:10 Speaker A You know, so we have situations in which we've been picking low-hanging easy fruit to console ourselves that we can all get at the objective reality. We've all seen optical illusions where, you know, some color is exactly the same wavelength but it looks two different ways because of the surrounding. That's a great example. Linger there for a second. 05:25 Speaker A irrationality of the square root of two there's a concept called not worth worrying about there's a lot of work it's not worth worrying about whether or not somebody's going to find a mistake in that proof because it's so short you know when it 05:39 Speaker A So again, we thought we knew what we were talking about, and then we find out at a deeper level that we didn't. And then we think we know what we're talking about again, and then it can reverse again. But that move to the deeper level is more facts, it's more context, it's more objectivity, right? But we already agreed on something that turned out not to be true as a direct fact. 05:51 Speaker A lot of damage to say we can prove that the square root of two is irrational and that's an objective fact up until you start trying to extend that you know to more and more complicated proofs and you know then it actually matters that 06:08 Speaker A And then so, so this, this the point is that I'm not entirely sure in any of these, like if I take this irrationality of the square root of two, there's a concept called not worth worrying about. There's a lot of work it's not worth worrying about whether or not somebody's going to find a mistake in that proof because it's so short. 06:23 Speaker A an objective claim a fact that I think has moral that that you won't agree would then that I think has moral consequence that we should grapple with so the ANA so connect to a very real-world issue like wealth inequality 06:39 Speaker A You know, when it comes to something like the ABC conjecture, you know, it's been going on for how many years? We still haven't, you know, gotten our arms around it. We're now not in the shallow end quite so much. 06:50 Speaker A want to correct for it but wealth inequality is just one kind of inequality there's every other kind of inequality and there's this fact that none of us and this goes to the freewill issue so so what we what we imagine is 07:04 Speaker A And so my concern is that it doesn't do a lot of damage to say we can prove that the square root of two is irrational and that's an objective fact up until you start trying to extend that, you know, to more and more complicated proofs. And, you know, then it actually matters that the original concept was the outside proof may exist, but proof checking isn't objective, and therefore we may never exactly know. 07:17 Speaker A you were born we don't can't truly own all of our advantages we didn't make ourselves but most people feel that there's something like a ghost in the machine that has free will that can make the best of even a bad situation now I 07:32 Speaker A But there are things that aren't worth worrying about. We call them objective fact for community. Let me make an objective, what I think is an objective claim, a fact that I think has moral, that you won't agree with, that I think has moral consequence that we should grapple with. 07:46 Speaker A should be morally salient you didn't make yourself you didn't determine anything about yourself that you would use as an exercise of your own free will so you are you're very intelligent you're very literate you're very interested in things that get you 08:03 Speaker A So then, so connect to a very real-world issue like wealth inequality, right? So wealth inequality is a problem if you think it's a problem, or it's inevitable if you think it's inevitable. But I think everyone would agree that some level of wealth inequality would be intolerable and that we would want to correct for it. 08:16 Speaker A help or hurt who knows what what influences are there but none of that is something that you have authored and that's true of everyone in the room you have exactly the disposition you have the efforts you have if you wake up 08:29 Speaker A But wealth inequality is just one kind of inequality. There's every other kind of inequality. And there's this fact that none of us, and this goes to the free will issue, so what we imagine is that people, they have some certain inheritance, they have their genes, they have their environments. They, you know, you didn't pick the fact that you weren't born yesterday and in Syria. You were born in a stable society when you were born. 08:41 Speaker A influence it had and not a little bit less or a little bit more you are part of a system of influences and so this is a picture in my view that just makes a mockery of the notion of free will right 08:50 Speaker A We don't, can't truly own all of our advantages. We didn't make ourselves. But most people feel that there's something like a ghost in the machine that has free will that can make the best of even a bad situation. 09:01 Speaker A didn't and I didn't choose that either so now that I think I think taking that on board does not rob us of morality I think because because we still have a preference between excruciating plunge into civil war and 09:18 Speaker A Now, I think you probably agree that some situations are so bad that the deck can be so stacked against you that, you know, it's just life is unfair. I think here acclaims about you that I think are true and have, how kind of, should be morally salient. You didn't make yourself. You didn't determine anything about yourself that you would use as an exercise of your own free will. 09:33 Speaker A happening like if I were we can build robots that act right and we are I'm moving my hands now but I honestly don't know about moving the hands I mean it right but the point that I'm making is 09:44 Speaker A So you are, you're very intelligent, you're very literate, you're very interested in things that get you ahead in all the ways you've gotten yourself ahead. You didn't create that about yourself, right? And obviously there's a genetic component to that, there's an environmental component to that, there's maybe there's just, you know, cosmic ray bombardment that can help or hurt. Who knows what influences are there? 09:54 Speaker A of English grammar our doing that you can't make a convincing case that I don't have free will I'm arguing that you can't make a convincing case you can build the civilization on lack of free will take this case I mean the moral 10:04 Speaker A But none of that is something that you have authored, and that's true of everyone in the room. You have exactly the disposition you have, the efforts you have if you wake up tomorr 10:16 Speaker A commitment or an ethical obligation that you wouldn't otherwise have you can't be the person who then says everyone just use basically you're on your own you either make it based on your effort or not I mean this goes to questions if we 10:30 Speaker A know should we have universal health care it's not just a quits not just an economic point you're going directly from is taught with no stop on the train at all for literally decades there there were very wealthy and very sophisticated 10:44 Speaker A countries that took the premises that you are building upon and built some of the most repressive regimes in history that they had other things going on they had bad ideas of economic I think they had personality cults they had I agree with 10:57 Speaker A all of them at the point that I'm making is that you are you are making definitive statements about value judgments with reference to a naturally selected in reaction of biology and environment I just don't know how you're getting from one to the 11:12 Speaker A other owning the the truth of biology do robots have morality is what I'm asking no they certainly would if we built them to have conscious states that would they could allow for suffering and well-being I mean that that's coming we're gonna 11:24 Speaker A have to ask that question so then we can be God but God can't make us those kind of robots but maybe try taking the fun out of this I thought I was crying you know one possibility is that there's 11:36 Speaker A like a layer cake and at the bottom you've got you know quantum field theory and then you get organic chemistry and you build this thing up and got natural and sexual selection then you get you know systems of morality riding on top 11:48 Speaker A of this and there's some sort of weird category or error between the layers of this cake so it may be that if you can get rid of quantum it in determinacy that you have effectively laplacian determinism and everything is product in 12:05 Speaker A initial conditions and that takes place at the lowest level but there's no morality at the level of you know exciting fields and electrons and forks so you know you don't put pair that observable which is like you know that 12:20 Speaker A quark is being unethical right now you know with some behavior which you know affected whether some synapse you know fired so that's that morality thing has to do with this very high up layer which is some sort of social 12:35 Speaker A organization which is not fundamental and so what I hear us doing is talking about freewill down here talking about morality up here and you know one of the lessons of physics is that you every layer of the cake has 12:51 Speaker A what has its own language game associated with it yes make all those observables right and so those observables are paired with what we might call effective theories right and so these effective theories are not to be mixed up and so every time we get 13:05 Speaker A into one of these free world conversations I don't know whether you're talking about free we have as if free will who was forced to buy a ticket in the night's event you know well no but answer that question really like did 13:17 Speaker A did you did you actually I didn't have to borrow yeah the night the night is young totally get it but but the point is is that I'm perfectly happy with the idea that I have as if free will at the top of the 13:33 Speaker A layer cake and and if we can get rid of quantum observation and get back to laplacian determinism at some higher level that I have no free will but but it's as if free will only because you actually are not aware of the proximate 13:46 Speaker A cause of your action and each time if I look at a chaotic pendulum over the Exploratorium it may have a very clear path that's determined through Newtonian mechanics but I'm not smart enough to figure it out so effectively I'm super 13:59 Speaker A surprised and just sit there like an idiot twirling of thinking oh wow I didn't think was going to do that you know even though I know the physics right so right the point is is that if I try to compute something that's much 14:09 Speaker A larger than I am my computer can't handle that much larger system so you know is why sort of self-reflection leads to madness and [Laughter] hopefully I don't don't hold your breath but it is coming okay but but what I'm trying to 14:36 Speaker A get at is is that the fun part of these conversations comes from making these category errs and the unfun part comes from sorting it out and then you know when I when I played Johnny raincloud everybody will say well okay I guess 14:49 Speaker A that makes sense but it's no fun anymore and so that's that's what I'm worried about well but you would still you're not disparaging the idea of a unity of knowledge right your layer of the cake you can make a smooth transition between 15:02 Speaker A layers that doesn't maybe that you serve your understanding of each layer I mean I have a fair idea when my wife's gonna be angry at me for not doing the dishes but I can't recover it from quantum field theory also the idea is that maybe 15:16 Speaker A that the quantum field theory determines our behavior no but there's nothing about doing dishes that violates quantum field theory I mean so it's not that you have to live in a different world view in order to talk about the human relations layer the 15:34 Speaker A órale or the free will layer or not I can do my best but I don't find it useful to try to think about human psychology from the point of view of of course of course yeah you know quit 15:47 Speaker A organic chemistry if some neurotransmitters depleted yeah you know so there are some ways in which these different layers can talk to each other but there's no reason that I should be able to compute necessarily across these layers successfully even if there is 16:01 Speaker A some sort of concept of entailment or determination what I'm interested in is kind of a first principle methodology of moving forward into the unknown right so local is so the what I would object to in religion and then 16:16 Speaker A this notion of Revelation is that there was some prior century where we were given the best ideas we're ever going to have on a specific topic and we must cling to those ideas until the end of time this is the analogy that were the 16:31 Speaker A the rubric that that I find most convincing I it's like there's there's only ever been people talking about reality here right and you can easily therefore you can either locate yourself in a current modern open-ended conversation or you can anchor yourself 16:49 Speaker A to an ancient one and never give yourself the freedom to rethink it so and you could have done it with home or you could have done it with Aristotle you could have done it with Shakespeare and the Hindus have done it with the 17:00 Speaker A Ramayana and the Mahabharata and you're in that you're losing no sleep over whether or not you should do likewise right and so my sense is that we need to every question of societal importance requires that we now outgrow the 17:15 Speaker A accidents of merely contingent history outgrow the fact that people used to be living in geographical isolation from one another and linguistic isolation from one another for centuries and outgrow therefore our religious provincialism and just get to a common 17:32 Speaker A humanity that's using the best tools available to solve the heart of problems I have a couple of quick responses to that the best tools available are all predicated on assumptions that you can only be made about human action and that 17:45 Speaker A you fundamentally reject again things like reason for things like free will why are we having a conversation here tonight why didn't anyone show up here to know okay but this is a philosophical confusion that that your let me try to 17:54 Speaker A just address it reason does not require free will reason requires a convincing me having a mind that can follow an argument and can care about whether or not you're following it but me responding to your argument is not a matter of choice at that point so 18:11 Speaker A what's never but it but it's the thing is reason is never a matter of choice if I convince reason superior to amygdala response passionate amygdala response well because one it's scalable one it's it's if I give you sufficiently good 18:23 Speaker A reasons for anything right you will helplessly believe what I believe it won't be a matter of choice you never choose well why are you giving me those reason if I prove to you that I'm using a lot of active verbs for a guy who has 18:36 Speaker A no capacity to choose himself well not but I'm doing using my language and then you're building a house using the bricks that I'm giving you no no the to stick with reason they were the one brick reason is a mode of 18:52 Speaker A influence whereby if you if you see the the syllogism actually runs through right or that just speak of reason even more broadly if I give you a set of facts that persuade you of something that that before this moment you were 19:07 Speaker A unaware of or thought was untrue you will helplessly take that on board if you're reasoning right so if I show you that two plus two makes four and you can't see it any other way even though you wish it made five you will 19:20 Speaker A helplessly believe that two plus two makes four you don't choose it you never choose it so I have kids your kids right do you have kids I love kids great so when it comes to free will I get it I'm 19:32 Speaker A completely on board Sam with your idea that there's no free will when it comes to raising kids where you don't tell them don't tell them sorry if you know I have 18 year old boy who's you know gorgeous and when I'm 19:49 Speaker A trying to tell him to do the right thing and he does something stupid and then I want to find out why he did that I don't even ask because it's a stupid question because he doesn't even know why he did it because he's a 18 year old 20:03 Speaker A boy but when I'm looking at impacting his future behavior where's the practical separation between knowing that there's really no free will and wanting your children to be responsible in their behavior and what they do in the world okay this is an 20:21 Speaker A important question I think there are many false assumptions about what it must mean to think that there's no free will so I think there's no free will but I think effort is incredibly important right I think you can't wait an example I use in my book I 20:39 Speaker A think is you know if you want to learn Chinese you can't just wait around to see if you learn it right it's not gonna happen to you I mean there's a way to learn Chinese and you have to do the 20:49 Speaker A things you need to do to learn Chinese otherwise it's not gonna happen every skill you or system of knowledge you could master it's like that and getting off of drugs is like that and getting into shape is like that and 21:02 Speaker A straightening out your life in any way that it's crooked it's like that but the recognition that you didn't make yourself and that you were exactly as you are at this moment because the universe is as it is in this moment 21:18 Speaker A it has a flip side which is you don't know how fully you can be changed in the next moment by good company in good conversations and reading good books and you don't know what if you you are you 21:33 Speaker A are an open system right and it's just a simple fact that people can radically change themselves you're not condemned to be who you were yesterday so I'm a huge fan of people who are totally off this message like if 21:49 Speaker A someone like Jaco willing right the Navy SEAL who's he's like the opposite of me in every respect right and and even on this question of free will you he's scared of you by the way good but get me so he's all about effort and 22:03 Speaker A and discipline and it's all true that all of human discipline matters discipline has consequences but again in each moment if you put on Jacko's podcasts tomorrow and it changes what you're going to do with your day by 25% 22:20 Speaker A and it's crucial to your happiness you again you're not in a position to know why it did that that day and didn't do it last Thursday and you're not even in a position to know why you turned it on 22:31 Speaker A really and again you're just you're open to the universe but again there's immense freedom in that it's not you can keep going in the direction that you you want to go but as far as to what to tell 22:43 Speaker A kids you need a strong sense of agency the measure of what to tell kids is what's what to tell anybody ultimately is what's true and useful right it's not just all but you just don't download random truths because some truths are I 22:56 Speaker A think not worth knowing at certain moments in life right you don't tell your eight-year-old about all the ways in which human beings can become diseased and die early and you know childhood cancer is on the menu and you 23:09 Speaker A know do you want to talk about that now that's not there's this too much reality at certain moments and I think empowering kids to feel like they can seize the reins of their lives is worth doing I mean assuming that there is no 23:21 Speaker A free will the parental machines that are pre-programmed to communicate that there is free will to the machines that have no free will that other children those those machines will do better so probably you were sent here by my 23:39 Speaker A laplacian determinism to ask this question so that we could respond without choice to tell you tell you the lies that [Applause] Topics: free will scientific materialism Sam Harris Ben Shapiro Eric Weinstein morality human behavior rationality philosophy determinism Study this video - [Flashcards from this video](https://sozai.app/tools/ai-flashcard-generator/?from=transcript&id=70291) - [Quiz on this video](https://sozai.app/tools/quiz-generator/?from=transcript&id=70291) Free, made by AI from this transcript. No signup. --- This is the markdown twin of https://sozai.app/transcript/sam-harris-ben-shapiro-eric-weinstein-free-will-debate/ — the same content, without the markup. Published by SozAI (https://sozai.app). Reuse and quotation are allowed with attribution and a link back. Machine-readable index: https://sozai.app/llms.txt · data API: https://sozai.app/api/