Do you choose freely? One could say that freewill is an illusion.

The point of s
aying freewill is an illusion is not to annoy you, the reader, but to bring to y
our attention a very simple notion: that one chooses freely, yes, but from choic
es predetermined by others.
The human central nervous system (CNS) is a supercomputer, receiving billion of
bits of data per second (inputs) and generating a multitude of decisions (output
s) on both the conscious and subconscious levels, e.g. subconscious - heart beat
regulation, food digestion, most decisions and conscious - some decisions, acti
ons and words. When someone asserts that freewill is an illusion, they're bringi
ng to the fore the following notions...
Garbage In, Garbage Out.
Our CNS's make decisions based on inputs. These inputs are information provided
to us by our environment. These days, our environment (information) is primarily
the outputs of other CNS's. That is to say that our lives are highly mediated.
And I'm not just talking about watching TV. We humans are rarely in touch with n
atural environs. We wake in a bed, walk on floors and streets to elevators in of
fices, use computers, telephones and newspapers to interact with the world. Our
CNS's eat the garbage of other CNS's, all the while we're led to believe we gene
rate our own original and proprietary garbage.
So what? Big deal, right? Is there any harm in taking the conveniences of modern
life for granted? Is there any harm in not knowing what goes into your body? Le
t's look at Coca-Cola for example, since it is the most widely consumed consumer
beverage on the planet. Is it OK to drink a Coca-Cola even though we do not kno
w its ingredients or how it was made? Our ignorance surely saves us time. Howeve
r, even in a simple, common and seemingly harmless situation like this, consumin
g the garbage (info) of others deludes us into choosing sub-optimally. We know o
r we think we know Coke is water, sugar, caffeine, gas and flavoring, but do we
know where these ingredients came from or how they got here? Do we know that the
phosphouric acid was mined in South Dakota, and processed at great cost to the
environment, such as toxic waste, air pollution and fossil fuel consumption? Tha
t the syrup was made in Atlanta from sugar cane, transported from Central Americ
a, and water, pumped out of wells it took centuries to fill? That the aluminum w
as mined in Australia, refined, processed (heated, rolled and cooled) at up to 5
different plants on as many as 3 different continents? That each step in the pr
ocess of producing, delivering, marketing and selling consumes vast amounts of e
nergy and produces vast amounts of waste which pollutes our skies, rivers, ocean
s, top soil and bodies such that only a fraction (less than1%) of the energy exp
ended to create the product actually ends up in our bodies? Or that the health e
ffects of regular cola consumption includes diabetes, obesity, osteoporosis, imp
aired calcification of growing bones in children, immune system impairment, toot
h decay, gingivitis, hypertension, mood swings, colon-rectal cancer, uterine, br
ain and bladder cancer (only for diet drinks containing Aspartame and Saccharin)
, liver disease, reduced fertility, impairment of fetal brain development (only
for Aspartame), severe PMS, etc.? By drinking Coke you are unknowingly killing y
ourself and the people, animals and plants of this great earth (as a result of a
ll the fossil fuels burned for you to consume this luxury). Thus, although you f
reely choose to drink Coke, your freewill is an illusion, as no one would consci
ously kill themselves or another. But YOU do. Every day.
Thus, Garbage In, Garbage Out, refers to the unevaluated information you consume
to make your choices. Since most only consciously process a few factors like co
st, thirst, effect of sugar/caffeine on energy, the decision on the surface appe
ars as freewill, but in reality is a grand delusion put forth by the few who gai
n from this farce. P&G, Unilever, Coke, etc. are not your friends. In fact, with
the information being withheld from you by them, they are indeed your master.
Those who believe in freewill build their belief on the notion that the consciou
s mind is involved in every part of a long, complicated and nuanced decision-mak
ing process. This is like being a car washer at a Ford factory and claiming, as
you were the last person from Ford to touch the car, that you made the car yours
elf. Are we really that naïve? The reality is that the conscious mind is only in
volved at the end of this process. Because one chooses to buy Coke instead of Pe
psi, means little in the grand scheme of the entire decision making process. Mos
t likely, your consumer choices today were determined months ago by a group of a
dvertising executives at Ogilvy Mather.
One could argue that consumer products companies are filling people's needs. Are
they really? Or are they manufacturing not only cheap toxic products, but the d
emand to consume them? We all have organic needs such as food, shelter, safety,
belongingness, love, etc., i.e. we don't have to be told to fill these needs; th
is code is written into the processor chip, your brain. The desire to consume Co
ca-Cola however, is an application downloaded to your subconscious in your youth
with software upgrades which are delivered with frightening frequency. All othe
r desires, in excess of the ones just mentioned are artificial, put in your head
by someone else. Why else would one choose to act against his own health and we
ll-being by eating animal carcasses, smoking cigarettes, drinking alcohol, drivi
ng lethal, expensive and polluting automobiles? Sure we choose from the options
available, but who chooses the options available?
The decision-making process involved in consuming Coke involves the subconscious
consideration of several factors. Consciously we know that the best way to alie
viate thirst is to drink mineral water. However water represents only a fraction
of beverage consumption. Soft-drinks, juices and alcoholic beverages comprise t
he vast majority. Why? It's more expensive and worse for you. One can argue that
taste is an important consideration, but does taste alone account for the multi
-billion dollar beverage industry? No. One only look at the paltry sales of powd
ered Gatorade in comparison to the exact same thing mixed with water. So conveni
ence also plays a role (bottled water is also readily available). Why then do im
itation soft drinks, which have similar taste and convenience, not to mention a
price which is much less than the name brand, not dominate the market? The answe
r is branding - Britney Spears and LeBron James to be exact. The subconscious as
sociation of certain brands with desirous qualities such as fun, thin, active, e
xciting, sexy, etc. is what makes the bulk of your decisions for you.
This is the result of a perpetual assault on your subconscious mind by the trium
virate, the consumer products, advertising and media industries. This tight-knit
bunch has been profitably at work on your subconscious since the 1940's. Let's
take television for example, as it is the most prevalent and effective advertisi
ng medium. Humans can only process about 1/3- 2/3 of the information beamed into
their brains (the rate of delivery greatly exceeds the human brain's rate of pr
ocessing, thinking and categorization). The rest of this data doesn't hit your f
orehead and fall to the floor, it sticks in your brain without you first being a
ble to consciously process it and most importantly, without your permission. You
are a mule for the CP/Adv/Media cartel. Your brain is the proverbial bottomless
anal cavity for any huckster with a marketing degree to use at his whim. Judgin
g by the amount of name brands in and on the body of the average American at thi
s very moment, one could drive a truck through their poop shoot.
This is not to say the conscious mind is totally disengaged. Your conscious mind
must be engaged in the process, as you have to drive to the store, negotiate tr
affic, choose between various brands and count money, but your definitions of se
xy, thin, active, exciting, etc. are formed in your subconscious via the none-to
o-subtle efforts of a bunch of cynical manipulators on Madison Avenue. Yes, you
choose, but you choose from only what they provide you with and towards ends tha
t only they define for you. How's your ass feel?
If there are indeed more choices than those predetermined for us by Madison Aven
ue, then what are they? What's missing? What are the hidden options? The most ob
vious option that is always left off the table is the option not to choose. Don'
t consume. When and how often is that option presented to you?
Who's the Boss?
What was Tony Danza really trying to tell us? Who is the boss of you? Who makes
the decisions? Each person possesses two entities within them and each of these
entities advocates choices that ensure its survival. The question is, what are t
hese entities and what is their definition of survival? For most, the brain is t
he henchman of the ego, i.e. the ego calls the shots and employs the brain to do
its bidding. The ego is that which gives us identity and separates us from othe
rs. The ego, when in charge, runs the brain in very much an autopilot fashion, m
aking unconscious decisions which ensure that the ego survives. The other entity
that lives within us is the God-self, that which dissolves distinction amongst
us and promotes unity. The God-self however is helpless when the ego has enabled
the brain to function on autopilot, which manifests itself in the work-consume-
sleep / stimulus-response sequence. In order for the God-self to gain hearing ri
ghts, the autopilot must be switched off, proffering an interruption in the stim
ulus-response sequence by inserting observation, a brief moment to consider the
validity of said response such that the sequence now reads Stimulus-Observation-
Response, or S-O-R. Observation gives the God-self the opportunity to utilize th
e brain towards its own ends.
The ends of the ego are to perpetuate the myth that we are all separate organism
s with independent and uncorrelated destinies. The ends of the God-self are to d
issolve this myth and assert an alternative hypothesis that we are all one. The
God-self anchors decisions on love, i.e. which decision most expresses love for
all. The ego anchors decisions on fear, i.e. which decision benefits my personal
well-being and/or those in my close personal network most and allays my fear th
at my perceived enemies can harm me.
"Who's the Boss?" refers to which force within you is dominating your decision-m
aking process? Is the ego dominating by enacting autopilot, removing observation
from your S-O-R sequence and robbing you of your freewill? Or is the God-self p
revailing and allowing you to observe, thereby exercising freewill? When the ego
is in charge, the individual receives identity from the decision-making process
- "I think therefore I am" or "I am my past, my decisions" or "My autopilot is
good." Identity of this sort yields a reactive state, where the true self or God
-self is silent and the brain's reactions to its environment (autopilot) becomes
the reality or identity. This is like thinking that a telephone is good because
you just heard good news from it. The conduit or medium for action, the brain,
is not the message, it is the messenger. The question is then, if the brain is o
nly the messenger, who sent the message and what is the identity of this entity?
With no O in the S-O-R model, the ego is the messenger. When the O (Observation
) exists in the S-O-R model, the God-self is the messenger. It's easy to tell wh
ich is sending the message by (1) the conscious realization of a pause or O and
(2) the intent of the message to either maximize personal well-being or that of
the whole - the whole body, society, country, planet, universe.
If one begins to make decisions from the God-self and truly assert his/her freew
ill, he/she identifies not with their body, history or decisions, but with every
thing. Why would one identify with anything less than the fullest expression of
his/her being, everything? That would be like asserting that since only the tire
s of a bicycle meet the road that tires are the single defining characteristic o
f bicycle travel. Unfortunately, most of the time our consciousness or self-awar
eness in engaged only when our physical bodies interact with our environment. Ho
wever, because a set of laws governs the interaction between bodies, does not ne
cessitate that the bodies are entirely separate, as laws govern people with fami
lies, govern families within society, govern states within countries, countries
amongst the planet, planets amongst a solar system and so forth. Each entity is
a truth, but part of a more-whole superceding truth. The same laws which govern
tiny spaces, such as those between strings in string theory, govern those betwee
n stars. This is not coincidence - our identities, reality and purpose is one. T
he God-self knows this and seeks to maximize the well-being of one. Interject th
e O into the S-O-R model and the oneness becomes manifest.
In conclusion, for most, free will is an illusion, as the inputs provided by our
environment are the result of filtering and mediation by others, e.g. do you ch
oose to kill yourself by smoking, car travel or stress? How about not choosing t
o kill yourself? Moreover, reactions to one's environment is not free will. Free
will is inputting data from the environment, pausing, asking what's missing and
then optimally choosing. Freewill is pure action, from the God-self, not from t
he ego. Free will exists when the God-self gains the opportunity to optimize the
greater good and only when the autopilot has been disengaged such the O exists
in the S-O-R model. When was the last time you exercised true free will?