Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Philosophy Club

[value]

This topic intends to discuss an ongoing philosophical development concerning free will, the societal implications of that development and the idea of a p-zombie AI world.

In the past decades a 'growing chorus of scientists and philosophers' have been arguing that free will does not exist and that view has grave societal implications that could materialize when AI achieves a level of philosophical zombie (p-zombie).

One of the primary goals of the movement is to replace retributive justice with (pharmaceutical money funded) forensic psychiatry. It has been going on for decades and some prominent professors are all-in to make it a reality and psychiatry has made progress in all these years. For the pharmaceutical industry it concerns a trillion USD growth potential.

The foundation of the movement is an attack on free will by denouncing it as an unjustified belief.

debatingfreewill.com (2021) by philosophy professors Daniel C. Dennett and Gregg D. Caruso.

(2021) The clockwork universe: is free will an illusion?
A growing chorus of scientists and philosophers argue that free will does not exist. Could they be right?

By far the most unsettling implication of the case against free will, for most who encounter it, is what it seems to say about morality: that nobody, ever, truly deserves reward or punishment for what they do, because what they do is the result of blind deterministic forces (plus maybe a little quantum randomness). “For the free will sceptic,” writes Gregg Caruso in his new book Just Deserts (DebatingFreeWill.com), a collection of dialogues with his fellow philosopher Daniel Dennett, “it is never fair to treat anyone as morally responsible.” Were we to accept the full implications of that idea, the way we treat each other – and especially the way we treat criminals – might change beyond recognition.

For Caruso, who teaches philosophy at the State University of New York, what all this means is that retributive punishment – punishing a criminal because he deserves it, rather than to protect the public, or serve as a warning to others – can’t ever be justified.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/a ... n-illusion

"The debate on free will vs. determinism has continued unabated for roughly 2500 years and seems to have become more prolific in the last ten years. (2023)
https://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/sk ... free-will/

Rejecting Retributivism: Free Will, Punishment, and Criminal Justice

Rejecting Retributivism: Free Will, Punishment, and Criminal Justice
rejecting-retributive.png (132.7 KiB) Viewed 3722 times

(2021) https://www.amazon.com/Rejecting-Retrib ... ks&sr=1-14

Free Will Skepticism in Law and Society: Challenging Retributive Justice.

Elizabeth Shaw, Derk Pereboom, and Gregg D. Caruso have compiled a volume that centralizes a question of great philosophical and practical importance -- what is the relationship between skeptical views about free will and criminal punishment? It provides an excellent new resource for anyone who finds some variety of free will skepticism appealing (or troubling), and thus feels a looming threat to retributive justification for our modern criminal justice system.

Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews
https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/free-will-skep ... e-justice/

Book: Cambridge University Press, 2019
https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/fr ... AF7E270760

I have spent several decades closely following the development of the movement in Dutch forensic psychiatry. My engagement in this field has been primarily through the critical blog Zielenknijper.com. Throughout this journey, I have maintained contact with numerous professors who have participated in trials as expert witnesses, often sharing their insights and critiques by email and on the blog.

My international connections include regular interactions with Jim Gottstein, the founder of PsychRights.org, and journalist Robert Whitaker during the time that he founded MadInAmerica.com. Although I once considered collaborating on an international platform with Whitaker, I ultimately decided to maintain my focus on the situation in the Netherlands after I failed to acquire psychiatry.com (my personal mantra is 'the best or nothing').

A short summary of my perspective is available in the following article about Dutch forensic psychiatry: https://en.zielenknijper.com/case-files/tbs/

The blog was closed in 2014 and I would later continue with an examination of eugenics on nature which in a sense is an extension of the core beliefs of the free will abolishment movement.

The idea of a p-zombie AI world might make it plausible that the free will abolishment movement will see its goals materialize.

When a p-zombie AI can perform wholly as a human does and can meet the ideal of those assigned with the vital task to control through laws. What argument would provide a human with a right to be divergent of a determined path?

What effect will a p-zombie AI have on the belief in free will or the social control systems that are based on that belief?

[JackDaydream]

For some time I have seen the denial of free will, especially in the writings of Dennett as having an ideological stance, including the illusion of consciousness. It is possible that will link with artificial intelligence as a means of social control.

My own thread discussion on potential totalitarianism, does look at the potential control as a direction which could happen in the cultural climate of the present time of authoritarianism. It is possible that artificial intelligence will play a role in this. It may all depend on the political uses which guide it and there does appear to be such a fascination with A1, with a mixture of wonder and fear. The idealism over it and belief in lack of free will may come together in a problematic way as having a nulling effect and in undervaluing the human person as being like a machine. The lack of belief in free will may have a potential power of self-fulfilling prophecy.

[value]

For some time I have seen the denial of free will, especially in the writings of Dennett as having an ideological stance, including the illusion of consciousness. It is possible that will link with artificial intelligence as a means of social control.

My own thread discussion on potential totalitarianism, does look at the potential control as a direction which could happen in the cultural climate of the present time of authoritarianism. It is possible that artificial intelligence will play a role in this. It may all depend on the political uses which guide it and there does appear to be such a fascination with A1, with a mixture of wonder and fear. The idealism over it and belief in lack of free will may come together in a problematic way as having a nulling effect and in undervaluing the human person as being like a machine. The lack of belief in free will may have a potential power of self-fulfilling prophecy.

I normally stay away from the politics forum but I noticed your post. It is indeed interesting to factor in a philosophical zombie level AI in which it is not possible to empirically distinguish whether it is conscious.

The AI might acquire a model role in society on which humans are to be reflected morally instead of the other way around, while the AI itself is moulded by a higher philosophical ideology. When the AI outperforms the human in almost every respect it would be in a natural position of power.

What would be the risks in such a situation? And how fast can the situation become a reality?

GPT-4 is about a year old and AGI is estimated to be reached by the end of this year.

From GPT to AGI
"The fundamental possibility of building an AI system with cognitive abilities close, in certain aspects, to human ones has already been demonstrated. Further work to miniaturize and reduce the power consumption of AI technologies will enable future creation of intelligent autonomous devices that make multimodal MLLM-type behaviors possible for robots operating in the physical world without the need for access to GPT-5-type server clusters."
https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2023/05/22/f ... r-landing/

Unleashing the Unknown: Fears Behind Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)
"AGI aims to replicate human cognitive abilities, potentially leading to robots replacing humans in various roles."
https://www.techopedia.com/fears-behind ... igence-agi

[LuckyR]

Even if Free Will does not exist (despite the complete lack of human experience to support this notion), there would be a logical role for the justice system in general and imprisonment specifically. Namely that if an individual by their brain state is Determined to be high risk of being a criminal, the idea of isolating them from law abiding citizens is logical. More importantly if society can alter the criminal's brain state through punishment to a different brain state that will Determine the criminal to perform less crime in the future is not only logical but would seem to be mandated by a belief in Determinism.

[value]

Even if Free Will does not exist (despite the complete lack of human experience to support this notion), there would be a logical role for the justice system in general and imprisonment specifically. Namely that if an individual by their brain state is Determined to be high risk of being a criminal, the idea of isolating them from law abiding citizens is logical. More importantly if society can alter the criminal's brain state through punishment to a different brain state that will Determine the criminal to perform less crime in the future is not only logical but would seem to be mandated by a belief in Determinism.

The assertion that physiology is the root cause of criminal behavior significantly alters the prevailing perspective. In this context, societal interests such as retributive justice and protection from recidivism do not supersede medical ethics, as forensic psychiatry is fundamentally grounded in the authority of the medical profession.

From the standpoint of medical ethics, it is imperative that criminals be guided towards rehabilitation under the supervision of a physician. In practice, this means that offenders are subject to the arbitrariness of doctors, and those who cooperate with their treatment have a better chance at regaining their freedom than those who resist.

In the Netherlands, there are cases that exemplify this issue. One instance involves a 14-year-old boy who was placed in forensic psychiatry after threatening his peers with a knife. Despite his good behavior throughout the years, he had no prospect of release and was entirely at the mercy of a doctor's opinion on his 18th birthday and he had to 'prey' to be free again. Conversely, some criminals who received life sentences for heinous crimes have been living freely for years through psychiatric leave, with some even starting families.

A major Dutch TV undercover documentary exposed an attempt by a pedophile child torturer and murderer to evade his life sentence through forensic psychiatry. While forensic psychiatry can be advantageous for those sentenced to life imprisonment and serious offenders, individuals convicted of relatively minor offenses may face potential lifelong imprisonment due to the arbitrariness of doctors' decisions.

Although your arguments may seem rational, the reality of the situation does not adhere to the "deemed reasonable". In fact, the pharmaceutical-psychiatric industry can only grow through a proliferation of problems and fear, with psychiatry being heavily influenced by pharmaceutical funding. This leads to practices that exacerbate problems and provoke societal fear, reinforcing the foundation of forensic psychiatry and enabling its growth.

The core principles of the free will abolishment movement aim to eradicate morality. It is seen that corruption is perceived as a strategic choice when it aligns with the perceived greater good of science. Corruption (on behalf of a greater good) appears to be perceived as a primary strategic advantage.

As an example, in 2010 Dutch psychiatry released a guideline that instructed institutions to release patients with a suicide wish to commit suicide on the streets, which looked like a political extortion tactic to acquire the right to euthanise patients. The background of that corruption, which is described in the following topic, shows corruption by psychiatry in practice in the real world (in the Netherlands).

Political extortion and euthanasia in psychiatry ('the Dutch way')
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=18546

In the absence of morality, it is seen that corruption emerges as a driving and even dominant force in pursuit of a perceived, dogmatic greater good. In a deterministic world, this greater good is centered around the interests of science (scientism of materialism philosophy).

What if scientism philosophy can find in a p-zombie AI world an ultimate ground to realize its 'greater good' ideals free of moral constraints? Does human morality even have a chance?

[value]

For some time I have seen the denial of free will, especially in the writings of Dennett as having an ideological stance, including the illusion of consciousness. It is possible that will link with artificial intelligence as a means of social control.

What do you think could be the motivation of the growing free will abolishment movement? What is the 'ideology' that you recognized?

[JackDaydream]

For some time I have seen the denial of free will, especially in the writings of Dennett as having an ideological stance, including the illusion of consciousness. It is possible that will link with artificial intelligence as a means of social control.

What do you think could be the motivation of the growing free will abolishment movement? What is the 'ideology' that you recognized?

Generally, I see the move towards materialism as the driving factor behind the belief in the absence of free will. There is the issue of science turning into scientism and this may be where it has a political dimension and ideologies. While Dennett is often seen as a major thinker in this way, it may be that the behaviorism of BF Skinner was a major influence, especially his 'Beyond Freedom and Dignity'. The relationship between free will and freedom may be overlooked in philosophy, as if free will is simply about cause and effect rather than about autonomy and freedom in life.

I have thought about the other post which you wrote in response to one of mine, about what would happen if the humans modelled themselves on artificial intelligence rather than the other way round. In its extreme it would be the material of thriller dystopian fiction, with the potential for loss of civilisation and a possible apocalypse. However, in a more subtle way, it may be happening already, with the capabilities of machines and the artificial being seen as superior. If this continues, it may that the appreciation of inner reality being undervalued, with too much emphasis on functionality. Politically, if the artificial intelligence is given dominant power, it would enable those who have created it to introduce agendas of control and potential dictatorship.

[value]

What do you think could be the motivation of the growing free will abolishment movement? What is the 'ideology' that you recognized?

Generally, I see the move towards materialism as the driving factor behind the belief in the absence of free will. There is the issue of science turning into scientism and this may be where it has a political dimension and ideologies. While Dennett is often seen as a major thinker in this way, it may be that the behaviorism of BF Skinner was a major influence, especially his 'Beyond Freedom and Dignity'. The relationship between free will and freedom may be overlooked in philosophy, as if free will is simply about cause and effect rather than about autonomy and freedom in life.

I have thought about the other post which you wrote in response to one of mine, about what would happen if the humans modelled themselves on artificial intelligence rather than the other way round. In its extreme it would be the material of thriller dystopian fiction, with the potential for loss of civilisation and a possible apocalypse. However, in a more subtle way, it may be happening already, with the capabilities of machines and the artificial being seen as superior. If this continues, it may that the appreciation of inner reality being undervalued, with too much emphasis on functionality. Politically, if the artificial intelligence is given dominant power, it would enable those who have created it to introduce agendas of control and potential dictatorship.

Thank you for the valuable insights!

The 'greater good of science' introduced by scientism philosophy seems to be the driving force behind the culture shift towards materialism. It has been going on for over a century and it resulted in a suppression of philosophy by placing philosophy on a level comparable with religions.

Philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) in Beyond Good and Evil (Chapter 6 – We Scholars) already warned about the start of the development in 1886.

"The declaration of independence of the scientific man, his emancipation from philosophy, is one of the subtler after-effects of democratic organization and disorganization: the self- glorification and self-conceitedness of the learned man is now everywhere in full bloom, and in its best springtime – which does not mean to imply that in this case self-praise smells sweet. Here also the instinct of the populace cries, “Freedom from all masters!” and after science has, with the happiest results, resisted theology, whose “hand-maid” it had been too long, it now proposes in its wantonness and indiscretion to lay down laws for philosophy, and in its turn to play the “master” – what am I saying! to play the PHILOSOPHER on its own account."

Science has been attempting to rid itself of philosophy and values which includes morality.

Science is operating on the basis of a dogmatic belief in uniformitarianism - the idea that the facts of science are valid without philosophy - which naturally results in an ideal to abolish morality.

(2018) Immoral advances: Is science out of control?
To many scientists, moral objections to their work are not valid: science, by definition, is morally neutral, so any moral judgement on it simply reflects scientific illiteracy.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg ... f-control/

I've been investigating the development of the movement from up-close for many decades through the critical blog Zielenknijper.com (which means Shrink in Dutch).

The blog was started with a philosophical consideration for free will: "When life would be good as it was, there would be no reason to exist.".

The blog had no ideological or political motivations. It was truly neutral and its primary drive was a simple quest on behalf of free will.

I remember the day when I decided to include forensic psychiatry. Of course I wasn't interested in the subject crime or related societal or political issues but the fact that people where shunned away from it provided the free will abolishment movement with a strategic edge to win.

One subject that the blog addressed is the Nazi holocaust and in specific the Eugenics ideology which is an example of an ideology grounded in scientism.

Hitler himself officially declared (as described in an article by a Jewish newspaper) that he did not hate the Jews originally and initially thought favourably of them.

What could explain that humanity was capable of the atrocities of the Holocaust?

My conclusion about the root cause of the Holocaust has been the following:

"The ideal of science to abolish morality and the consequent ideas propagated as a greater good for humanity by a scientific establishment (scientism's greater good!) is hard to challenge for individual people. It would require 'philosophy beyond science' to do so and science was in its infancy and fighting its way into the world by suppressing philosophy and religions, as shown by the quote of philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche in Beyond Good and Evil (Chapter 6 – We Scholars).
...
The idea that the facts of science are valid without philosophy results in the natural tendency to completely abolish morality.

This might explain why in that dark time before the Holocaust morality stood to lose ground in the face of an international scientific establishment that was reaching its heights. The rise of science resulted in an attempt to shed humanity of morality.

The root of the problem that led to the Nazi holocaust and barbaric (immoral) practices therefore has been the preceding evolution of science that resulted in the suppression of philosophy and morality. "

The Philosophical Roots of the Holocaust: Psychiatry, Eugenics, Scientism, and the Loss of Morality
https://en.zielenknijper.com/case-files/holocaust/

Canadian philosopher Bonnie Burstow once mentioned the following:

(2019) “Psychiatric Eugenics Then and Now — You Betcha It’s Still Happening!”
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
https://www.madinamerica.com/2019/07/ps ... n-and-now/

The free will abolishment movement attempts to shed humanity of morality and is very open about that. What will stand in its place is science its 'greater good' in the form of psychiatry. It has been attempted in the past...

A growing chorus of scientists and philosophers argue that free will does not exist. Could they be right? By far the most unsettling implication of the case against free will is what it says about morality...

How would the situation look like in a world dominated by p-zombie AI that is necessarily controlled by a higher philosophy? And what type of higher philosophy could that be other than scientism philosophy that, as is evident from history and the logic provided in this post, naturally intends to shed humanity of morality?

[LuckyR]

For some time I have seen the denial of free will, especially in the writings of Dennett as having an ideological stance, including the illusion of consciousness. It is possible that will link with artificial intelligence as a means of social control.

What do you think could be the motivation of the growing free will abolishment movement? What is the 'ideology' that you recognized?

Neuroscience folks gotta play with their toys (fMRI), which is what they're for, after all. Dataists (believers in dataism) lap this stuff up as it fits their view of the post-Humanist future they envision.

[value]

For some time I have seen the denial of free will, especially in the writings of Dennett as having an ideological stance, including the illusion of consciousness. It is possible that will link with artificial intelligence as a means of social control.

What do you think could be the motivation of the growing free will abolishment movement? What is the 'ideology' that you recognized?

Neuroscience folks gotta play with their toys (fMRI), which is what they're for, after all. Dataists (believers in dataism) lap this stuff up as it fits their view of the post-Humanist future they envision.

I know that you work as a physician so your perspective is interesting.

What does a post-Humanist future entail? Does it involve a 'greater good' ideology, e.g. a future in which human evolution is controlled by science?

[LuckyR]

For some time I have seen the denial of free will, especially in the writings of Dennett as having an ideological stance, including the illusion of consciousness. It is possible that will link with artificial intelligence as a means of social control.

What do you think could be the motivation of the growing free will abolishment movement? What is the 'ideology' that you recognized?

Neuroscience folks gotta play with their toys (fMRI), which is what they're for, after all. Dataists (believers in dataism) lap this stuff up as it fits their view of the post-Humanist future they envision.

I know that you work as a physician so your perspective is interesting.

What does a post-Humanist future entail? Does it involve a 'greater good' ideology, e.g. a future in which human evolution is controlled by science?

Well, once intelligence is decoupled from consciousness (through AI), then the entire Humanist paradigm is in jeopardy, since humans will no longer be the most intelligent entities in our experience. Thus the desires and whims of humans logically would have the same weight as that of a dog or a sheep (and humans routinely treat animals, in general, abominably). Now one way to delay the demise of Humanism would be to upgrade humans into cyborgs, but that is likely a short term stopgap. Thought I agree with you that as a separate issue human evolution will be more controlled by science, than it is now. And especially for the wealthy and the powerful.

[value]

Well, once intelligence is decoupled from consciousness (through AI), then the entire Humanist paradigm is in jeopardy, since humans will no longer be the most intelligent entities in our experience. Thus the desires and whims of humans logically would have the same weight as that of a dog or a sheep (and humans routinely treat animals, in general, abominably). Now one way to delay the demise of Humanism would be to upgrade humans into cyborgs, but that is likely a short term stopgap. Thought I agree with you that as a separate issue human evolution will be more controlled by science, than it is now. And especially for the wealthy and the powerful.

What do you think that the outlook is for the criminal justice system in a world that is dominated by philosophical zombie level AI?

[JackDaydream]

For some time I have seen the denial of free will, especially in the writings of Dennett as having an ideological stance, including the illusion of consciousness. It is possible that will link with artificial intelligence as a means of social control.

What do you think could be the motivation of the growing free will abolishment movement? What is the 'ideology' that you recognized?

Neuroscience folks gotta play with their toys (fMRI), which is what they're for, after all. Dataists (believers in dataism) lap this stuff up as it fits their view of the post-Humanist future they envision.

I know that you work as a physician so your perspective is interesting.

What does a post-Humanist future entail? Does it involve a 'greater good' ideology, e.g. a future in which human evolution is controlled by science?

I have read Ben Goldacre's 'Big Pharma' which looks at the role of the drug companies in psychiatry. I have a background in psychiatric nursing but am aware how it can be a form of social control, especially when people are Sectioned and given medication forcibly. Prior to my training I read in the tradition of the antipsychiatry movement, especially RD Laing and Thomas Szaz.

It is hard to know what way psychiatry will go with artificial intelligence. There is a growing shift from the psychodynamic model towards a biological understanding and the cognitive behavioural model towards therapeutic interventions. Many psychiatrists do adhere to a medical model mainly. I wonder if this is because they come from a background in the physical sciences. However, the biopsychosocial approach is considered important. The overlap between eugenics, medical treatments and cognitive- behavioural approaches could be a means of a social control of the human inner world, especially if artificial intelligence plays a significant role within interventions.

[LuckyR]

Well, once intelligence is decoupled from consciousness (through AI), then the entire Humanist paradigm is in jeopardy, since humans will no longer be the most intelligent entities in our experience. Thus the desires and whims of humans logically would have the same weight as that of a dog or a sheep (and humans routinely treat animals, in general, abominably). Now one way to delay the demise of Humanism would be to upgrade humans into cyborgs, but that is likely a short term stopgap. Thought I agree with you that as a separate issue human evolution will be more controlled by science, than it is now. And especially for the wealthy and the powerful.

What do you think that the outlook is for the criminal justice system in a world that is dominated by philosophical zombie level AI?

Well the justice system is dominated by lawyers (as is the political system), thus it (they) operates much of the time outside the bounds of logic. Therefore it is an example of an area that can likely dodge the greater effect of AI, especially in the short to medium term. In other words I wouldn't bet on lawyers to arrange a system that makes their profession irrelevant.

[value]

Well the justice system is dominated by lawyers (as is the political system), thus it (they) operates much of the time outside the bounds of logic. Therefore it is an example of an area that can likely dodge the greater effect of AI, especially in the short to medium term. In other words I wouldn't bet on lawyers to arrange a system that makes their profession irrelevant.

Yes, Big Law is powerful and has great financial interests, but when it concerns AI it seems that the profession is uprooted first.

(2023) A.I. Is Coming for Lawyers
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/10/tech ... again.html

Legal and finance jobs are among the most at risk from AI
https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/legal ... 58359.html

Law Society predicts 'savage reduction' in legal jobs as AI takes over
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/law-s ... 72.article

Most jobs being replaced by AI - an estimated 300 million jobs in the next five years - are so called 'white collar knowledge worker' jobs.

Bill Gates recently said, “ChatGPT will be like having a white-collar worker available to assist you with various tasks,”.

Besides this, there is an independent reason why Big Law might not naturally be able to fend off a take over of the criminal justice system by the free will abolishment movement.

My article about forensic psychiatry in the Netherlands contains the following consideration:

"Why should the interests of a criminal be prioritized over the desires of victims for retribution or the need to set societal examples of good and bad behavior?

It will ultimately come down to abolishing a belief in free will.

When lawmakers are presented with the prospect of preventing crime, and when that idea is supported and promoted by the scientific community, it becomes difficult to argue against replacing the retributive justice system with forensic psychiatry.

Despite the financial interests of the legal profession (Big Law), the pharmaceutical industry + psychiatry + the idea of the ability to prevent crime may ultimately gain the upper hand. There is simply much more money involved for them and they can paint a picture of a better world.

It will come down to the ability to defend free will. And if individuals are unable to defend it, they will likely put their trust in the scientific community. This is a risk-free choice versus taking responsibility for defending free will which may explain why psychiatry has been winning so easily, while from the outlook, Free Will Skepticism may appear questionable. "

There is much more money involved for the free will abolishment movement (literally trillions instead of billions) and it serves the greater good of scientism philosophy within the scientific community that might find its ultimate fertile ground in a world dominated by a philosophical zombie level AI, and with that acquires a basis to fulfil its (centuries ongoing) ideal of shedding humanity of (religions and) morality for the greater good of science.

The free will abolishment movement is also better able to paint a picture of a better world. Legislators seek certain results through control and a belief in free will results in uncertainty.

In a world without morality and in which human mental existence is to be considered within the mastery of science through psychiatry, there seems to be no place for a criminal justice system.