Is free will something we should want to have?

In my post about free will where I delved into the question if free will could exist or not , I came to the conclusion that it is impossible to create artificial intelligence with true free will, since no organism or mechanism can have true free will.
In my later post on the closest thing to free will we can achieve I concluded that the highest form of free will that can be acheived by a brain in the universe is an introspectral level of infinity. But I failed to ask the obvious question, is free will something we want, and should we want free will?

Introspectral level zero, spectre level zero for short, is a rock, spectre level 1 is a creature with senses, motor functions and a translator (brain) that turn one into the other (humans are in this level). Spectre level 2 is a creature making its decisions by viewing an MRI recording of its brain as it first decides it in spectre level 1. Introspectral level 3 is a creature making its decision with a recording of its brain as it decided something in introspectral level 2. There is in an infinite series of introspectral levels in the introspectrum.
If a rock has the lowest form of free will, then a creature with an introspectral level of infinity has the highest form of free will possible.
Something you will also have to know is that a brain is not 100% likely choose the same decision twice, simply because it has knowledge of its previous decision, and that makes the two events different with different possible outcomes.

Thus, the closest thing to free will we can reach, without infinite brainpower or infinite time, is to act AS IF we have an infinite spectre level. This is for example by not deciding anything at all with brainpower. Because brainpower will determine that decision X is right in an infinite number of spectre levels, and also determine that decision Y is right in an infinite number of spectre levels. So knowing this, no decision in any spectre level is more valid or “correct” than another.

But how do we decide between options without a brain? With mathematics. With mathematics, a properly encompassing formula will get the same result in the same scenario again and again, and no amount of rationalization will change the result. For example, 4×4 is 16, no amount of spectre levels can change that.

Now to get back to the original question, do we want free will, now that we know what form of free will we can achieve?
Barry Schwartz video on youtube is helpful in this question.
“The way to maximize freedom is to maximize choice. The more choice people have the more freedom they have, the more freedom they have the more welfare they have” – Is the common sense belief. Yet he finds that less choice makes people more happy. And more choice make people less happy. Because when you buy the jeans that are the only jeans, you’re X happy, but if you have a choice between a million different jeans, you expect more happyness than if you only have one choice. Its your own fault that you did not make the right choice. In a way. But when there is only one choice, if the choice is bad, its not your fault, its the fault of the manufacturer, government, salesman etc.
He also found that for every 10 mutual funds the employer offered, rate of participation went down 2%. You offer 50 pension funds and 10% less people participate, than if you offered one. And don’t forget this is free money 2% say no to for every 10 extra funds offered. Its money the employer would give them so that they can live well in their retirement.
If you have other options, they subtract from the value of the choice you have made. All the choice make it possible to do better, to find a better pair of jeans than when there was only one type of jeans. But you will feel worse because the expectations of how good jeans should be, will be higher, and you will then never be pleasantly surprised by having lots of choice.

Knowing this. Do we want free will? Yes. Should we want free will? Yes. But only when free will is acting as if you have introspectrum (spectre level of infinity). Thus, you must use mathematics to decide. Not brainpower. Because if you decide something with mathematics, you end up with just one choice, the best choice, and if done correctly, an indisputable correct choice that will always be correct. But any brain choice will be infinitely disputable. This means politics should not be anything else than mathematics. Budgets and economies should be mathematics. When you decide if you want a child or a house, or which house, mathematics. what you want to buy, if you want to buy, if you should buy, what you should eat, what you want to eat etc, all mathematics.

I do not have the faintest idea of how to calculate if I should buy a house or not. But if I have no idea how to calculate that with the tools of science then I should not expect my brain to find out if I really should buy a house or not either.

Vist 444 ganger. Følges av 1 person.