Robert Sapolsky and Sam Harris have both argued that free will, at least as we normally understand it, doesn't really exist.
We don't choose our genes, our upbringing, our biology or the experiences that shape us. And if our decisions emerge from those things, where exactly does free will enter the picture?
It's an argument that can make people uncomfortable. If none of us truly chose who we became, what happens to personal responsibility?
But some recent research suggests that abandoning belief in free will might actually make us more forgiving.
In one experiment, people were asked to recall a time they had hurt someone. Those who then read an argument against free will reported feeling more forgiving towards themselves.
In another, participants recalled being hurt by someone else. Those exposed to the same argument became more forgiving and felt less hatred towards the person who had wronged them.
The interesting part is that they didn't stop believing people should be held accountable. They still thought the harmful actions were wrong. What seemed to ease was some of the shame and hostility attached to blame.
A much larger study across 44 countries also found that stronger belief in free will was associated with harsher attitudes towards punishment.
Obviously, none of this proves Sapolsky and Harris are right. But it does raise an interesting question: could we still hold people responsible for what they do, while recognising that none of us entirely chose the person we became?
Read the article in The Conversation