Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Free will and the power of veto: Convergent evidence from Decision-Making Alex Linhares [email_address]
The traditional view of Free Will <ul><li>Compare & contrast choices </li></ul>
…is just like chess. However, <ul><li>But is this of any quality? </li></ul>
Ron “Suki” King, a checkers world champion <ul><li>385 opponents—simultaneously </li></ul><ul><li>He beat them all </li></...
Capablanca’s remark <ul><li>“ I see only one move.  The best one.”   </li></ul><ul><li>Jos é Raul Capablanca </li></ul>
Gary Klein’s work <ul><li>Firefighters, nurses, jet pilots, radar operators, chess players, etc… </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ I...
Recognition-primed decisions <ul><li>Experienced subjects unconsciously primed to act </li></ul><ul><li>Simulation heurist...
Back to Free Will… <ul><li>Libet’s experimental settings </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Complexity clock </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li...
Libet’s experiment  <ul><li>Libet wanted to contrast the times between (i) movement of the fingers, (ii) the start of the ...
 
In Libet’s words: <ul><li>“ the brain evidently ‘decides’ to initiate or, at least, to prepare to initiate an act before t...
Veto theory: <ul><li>“ Potentially available to the conscious function is the possibility of […] vetoing the final progres...
If Klein is right, then what would the expected timing of neuro-events be like? <ul><li>Gary Klein </li></ul><ul><li>Subje...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Eurocogsci 2007 Presentation

819 views

Published on

Free will and the power of veto: convergent evidence from decision-making

Published in: Technology, Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Eurocogsci 2007 Presentation

  1. 1. Free will and the power of veto: Convergent evidence from Decision-Making Alex Linhares [email_address]
  2. 2. The traditional view of Free Will <ul><li>Compare & contrast choices </li></ul>
  3. 3. …is just like chess. However, <ul><li>But is this of any quality? </li></ul>
  4. 4. Ron “Suki” King, a checkers world champion <ul><li>385 opponents—simultaneously </li></ul><ul><li>He beat them all </li></ul><ul><li>2 seconds per move  12.30mins response </li></ul>
  5. 5. Capablanca’s remark <ul><li>“ I see only one move. The best one.” </li></ul><ul><li>Jos é Raul Capablanca </li></ul>
  6. 6. Gary Klein’s work <ul><li>Firefighters, nurses, jet pilots, radar operators, chess players, etc… </li></ul><ul><ul><li>“ I never make decisions. I can’t remember a single decision” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ It is always obvious what to do” </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. Recognition-primed decisions <ul><li>Experienced subjects unconsciously primed to act </li></ul><ul><li>Simulation heuristic  YES/NO response </li></ul>
  8. 8. Back to Free Will… <ul><li>Libet’s experimental settings </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Complexity clock </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Readiness potential </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Suprising timing of events </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Libet’s experiment <ul><li>Libet wanted to contrast the times between (i) movement of the fingers, (ii) the start of the readiness potential, and (iii) the instant in which the conscious decision is taken… </li></ul><ul><ul><li>This instant can be measured with ‘Wundt’s compexity clock’, a moving dot (like a second’s pointer), performing one full cycle at each 2.56 secs. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Classic method in experimental psychology </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Very accurate: one hour  0.2 secs </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>The results are clear... </li></ul>
  10. 11. In Libet’s words: <ul><li>“ the brain evidently ‘decides’ to initiate or, at least, to prepare to initiate an act before there is any reportable subjective awareness that such a decision has taken place”. </li></ul><ul><li>“ it is concluded that cerebral initiation even of a spontaneous voluntary act of the kind studied here can and usually does begin unconsciously”. </li></ul><ul><li>Brain 106 (1983) 623-42 </li></ul>
  11. 12. Veto theory: <ul><li>“ Potentially available to the conscious function is the possibility of […] vetoing the final progress of the volitional process[…]” </li></ul><ul><li>“ Conscious will might block or veto the process, so that no act occurs.” </li></ul><ul><li>Libet, B. (1999) Do we have free will? Journal of Consciousness Studies 6, 47—57. </li></ul>
  12. 13. If Klein is right, then what would the expected timing of neuro-events be like? <ul><li>Gary Klein </li></ul><ul><li>Subjects unconsciously primed to act; acts feel “obvious”; subjects cannot report on reasons; do not feel to be making decisions </li></ul><ul><li>Simulation heuristic vetoes a primed urge </li></ul><ul><li>Benjamin Libet </li></ul><ul><li>The brain initially prepares for an act, subjects only report conscious will to perform the act 250msec after onset of the RP </li></ul><ul><li>There is 100msec for an act to be “vetoed” </li></ul>

×