Q&A: Free Choice and Reward and Punishment
Free Choice and Reward and Punishment
Question
Hello Rabbi Michi,
I once happened to read several articles by Professor Haim Sompolinsky, a physicist and observant brain researcher, who argues that in light of research in neuroscience and cognition it is clear that free choice does not exist, and he espouses absolute determinism and materialism.
I once had the chance to meet him, and I asked him how his theory fits with reward and punishment, for example. He said something like this: "Confusing the denial of free choice with the human capacity for thought and rational decision-making is a pitfall that many fine people stumble over. Even in a world that operates according to its nature (perhaps only in such a world), we are affected by the results of our actions and guide our steps wisely so that we may receive reward and avoid loss,"
I confess, without embarrassment, that I didn't really manage to understand his answer.
I would be very grateful if you could please help me out.
Thank you very much,
Answer
Hello.
He is right. In principle, a situation is possible in which there is no free choice, yet a person calculates what is right to do and does it (necessarily). That calculation is forced on him and is fed, among other things, by punishment (just as an animal avoids something painful). But he is not right in thinking that there is any point in punishing him for wrong choices. If a person chose wrongly, then he had to do so. Sompolinsky views punishment as a conditioning mechanism whose purpose is to ensure that a person chooses correctly (necessarily, as in the example of the animal) and not as a sanction for criminal judgment. It is like lighting a fire in a place where we do not want people to walk.
These matters are explained in detail in my book The Science of Freedom, including discussion of his view (I have had a long-running debate with him).