Essay:On Free-Will and Materialism

The question arises upon occasion, when Christian apologists speak with atheists, whether they believe in free-will. "Surely," the Christian posits, "you agree that people must be held accountable for their actions; and if a person does not have free-will, then how can they be held accountable for things beyond their control? However, if you believe in a completely materialistic world, then you cannot believe in free-will, because the decisions a person makes are the result of chemicals and neurons, and their interactions are determined by the laws of nature, and are therefore beyond the control of the person.  Indeed, without God, there cannot be free-will; and without free-will, it follows, there can be no moral responsibility; and without moral responsibility, it again follows, anarchy and chaos would reign."

A Materialistic Look At Free-Will
This is a thorny question, but can be addressed by the atheist as follows:


 * 1) The energy and matter throughout the universe follow the natural laws


 * 2) The natural laws determine the physical interaction of energy and matter


 * 3) The human brain is made of matter


 * 4) Actions and thoughts are derived from the physical interaction of chemicals and neurons in the brain


 * 5) The natural laws determine the physical interactions of the brain (from 2 and 3)


 * 6) Physical interactions can fundamentally change the structure of matter


 * 7) Humans have sensory organs the physically interact with the material world by receiving energy and/or matter (from 2)


 * 8) The brain receives the input from sensory organs, which affects the development and structure of the brain throughout the life of the human (from 5, 6, and 7)


 * 9) The changes in the brain affect it's future physical interactions (from 4)


 * 10) Prior experiences affect future actions (from 8 and 9)


 * 11) The brain can learn about cause and effect from the input from the seonsory organs


 * 12) The brain can select for or against actions based on their outcomes (from 10 and 11)


 * 13) Evolution through natural selections confers traits through genetics that improve survivability


 * 14) The initial state of the brain, prior to the introduction of any environmental factors (including in utero), is determined by genetics


 * 15) Initially, and excepting genetic defects, the brain is generally predisposed towards actions that improve survivability (from 13 and 14)


 * 16) Any behavior that aids survivability is inherently selfish


 * 17) Animals are inherently selfish to ensure primacy in survival


 * 18) Primates are animals


 * 19) Primates form tribal groups to aid in survival


 * 20) Tribal groups require some form of cohesion an cooperation


 * 21) Cohesion and cooperation are inherently selfish acts in that they help improve survivability (from 17, 18, 19, and 20)


 * 22) Humans are primates


 * 23) Humans are predisposed towards activities that enhance cohesion and cooperation (from 15, 19, 20, 21, and 22)


 * 24) Disruptive acts that are contrary to cohesion and cooperation may reduce survivability (from 21)


 * 25) The brain is predisposed towards unity rather than chaos (from 23 and 24)


 * 26) Altruistic actions are rewarded in society, and disruptive actions are punished


 * 27) The brain can change to select for actions that are rewarded or promote unity, and against actions that are punished or promote chaos (from 12, 25 and 26)


 * 28) Responsibility for ones actions is a societal belief that improves cohesion and cooperation


 * 29) The brain can adapt to make decisions under the premise that the human is responsible for the actions it compels the human to undertake and any rewards or punishments that arise from those actions (from 27 and 28)

Conclusion
This is important to understand, because it has a specific impact on culpability. A properly functioning brain will make decisions for us the same way that a free-willed human would, making the two concepts fundamentally the same; it will weigh risk and reward, and bias towards actions that it believes will result in the best outcome. Those decisions are made through the filter that, ultimately, we must accept responsibility for whatever action we undertake. So a materialistic brain, with no free-will, will still understand that there is both a penal and social risk to committing murder, and that risk must be weighed against the reward received from the murder. Whether those risks and rewards are weighed by a materialistic mind from the interaction of chemicals and neurons, or from a free-willed mind contemplating them seperate from the brain, the result is the same. Additionally, those decisions are made with the understanding that society holds them responsibility for their actions, whether the person agrees that they should be responsible or not. Similarly, when a person is found to be mentally deficient or insane, and therefore unable to reasonable evaluate the risk/reward for a course of action (i.e. - unable to determine if it is right or wrong based on the understood moral and ethical standards of society), they are not held responsible for those actions in the same way that a mentally competent person would.

What this ultimately means is that the materialistic methods through which the brain determines courses of action are based on its understanding of the world, including cause and effect, and societal pressure to behave (or not behave) in a certain way creates the filters through which those choices are made, otherwise known as the "illusion of free-will". Humans without free-will will behave exactly the same as humans with free-will, because the basis on which the decisions are made are the same, is it only the mechanisms that are different.