I have a number of friends that are religious fundamentalists. We enjoy
debating the important issues of our respective belief systems: skepticism
for me, and Christianity or Judaism for them. The latest of these has been
free will. I’ve touched on the topic a
number
of times before, but would like to revisit it again.Upon being presented the
moral mechanics of
Christianity’s Fall of Man
I again put forth my argument regarding free will in that situation:
My fundamentalist friend’s reply was focused on the logical conclusions that
I must reach were I to embrace a lack of free will in a practical sense.
While I find the approach to be almost unrelated, it still has merit that’s
worth exploring. He says:
This may seem to some like an absurd argument to some, but upon closer
inspection there is something to it. It doesn’t speak to whether or not we
have free will, but rather to the consequences of believing that we
don’t. Quite simply, it says that if one is to embrace the idea of
no-free-will to its logical conclusion then we must accept a whole package
of uncomfortable truths along with it.
A World Without Free Will
Just for the sake of tidiness allow me to restate the no-free-will
proposition that I’m offering. The basic idea is that however we got here,
we are little more than highly complex machines. We process input through a
finite and knowable system and arrive at a decision. That decision looks
random to us because we neither have full knowledge of the decision system
itself (our biology), nor the seemingly incalculable number of variables
that influence it (every single event that’s ever influenced us).
The unpleasant conclusion that we must reach when accepting the proposition
above is that we have nothing to do with our fate. Happy people are lucky.
Suffering people are unlucky. Murder cannot be held accountable for their
actions, and no credit can be given to heroes for their bravery.
Just thinking about it almost throws me into a panic. Cognitive dissonance
nearly overwhelms me. The idea instantly nullifies everything our
civilization is built upon — most notably the very notion of personal
responsibility. The criminal justice system becomes akin to a perverse child
care system where babies are tortured for crying or asking for food.
Defining the Variables
Perhaps free will is
the necessary delusion
after all. But if it’s necessary to ignore free will in order to function in
this world, let’s at least define the truth before proceeding to turn our
backs to it for practical reasons. Below I’ll attempt to present
a universal theory of human action according to a world in which we
lack free will. Here are the variables:
-
Where We StartWere you born in Etheopia or the Hamptons? Did you
go to a private school or have you never seen a book? Were you starved
of nutrition during while in the womb, or did you have the world’s best
formulas while listening to Baby Motzart? Nothing determines where one
will end up more than where one started. -
Our Genetic GiftednessIntelligence, beauty, athleticism, artistic
talent, motivation — all these help a person regardless of where they
came from or what they are exposed to. This is why some people rise from
the ghetto and others falter despite a legion of opportunities.I place
intelligence at the top of this list because I think it offers the
largest adaptive advantage. If you have one or more of these things you
tend to do well. If you don’t, you tend not to. This is true regardless
of where you started or what you experience in life. -
What Happens to UsLife is random. It doesn’t matter if you went
to Harvard and eat dinner with Bill Gates every Sunday; if you get a
rare disease and die at age 30 you can’t do much about that. Some people
get in the wrong relationship and end up on heroin. Others randomly bump
into someone on the street and get handed a career they never could have
achieved in school.Who we meet and what happens to us defines who we
are. Forrest Gump was lucky to have been in the right places at the
right time; a child who saw his family murdered in front of him was not.
Both situations deeply effect the outcome of their lives, and neither
person had any input into the situation.
The one thing stands out about these three variables is that we don’t have
any control over any of them. It looks like we do, and it feels like
we should, but we don’t. We fall prey to the common delusion that it’s not
what we were handed that matters, but what we do with it.
What people fail to realize is that our ability to capitalize on what
were given is in fact something we were given.
Read that again. There aren’t two different things — 1) genetic abilities
and 2) motivation to make use of genetic abilities. No. In fact those are
arguably one in the same. The only thing that determines one’s ability to
make use of their own gifts and talents is #1 Where they came from, #2 How
much motivation they have inherently, and #3 how they were raised and the
experiences they had in life.
In other words, we’re just responding to stimuli. The doctor who
makes great financial decisions and looks down on those who doesn’t is a
pompous ass. He had at least two out of the three variables go strongly in
his direction. He’s basically a lucky bastard.
The crack whore down the street, however, was born prematurely with Fetal
Alcohol Syndrome and a less than average IQ. She ends committing an armed
robbery and going to jail for life. Did she make a poor choice or was there
simply no choice at all? What part of the equation was she in control of?
The decision to “break out” of a set of negative conditions improve oneself
is NOT independent of the three variables. It’s part of them. As is the
decision to rebel against the world and start carjacking and raping people.
Quite simply, if you accept the fact that we have no control over the three
universal variables then we forfeit the ability to heap praise on the
virtuous or scorn on the wicked. Is this the world we live in?
0 responses on "Security Is Not A Technology Problem: Why Companies Need To Be Looking At Organizational Issues Instead Of Products"