4.11 Appendix 1: Democracy and Freedom—Outdated Concepts?
79
people would be sent to prison not for wrongdoing, but for disturbing public order.
There would be also no freedom of press. However, in such a framework, business
leaders and policy-makers couldn’t take any decisions as well. We would just have
to accept what is happening to us.
In other cultures, it is being recognized that people can make their own decisions, but everyone is expected to subordinate personal decisions to the interests
of higher-level institutions or to those who are more powerful. Such societies are
hierarchically organized. Compared to this, in Western democracies the power of
people and institutions has been limited by law in favor of individual freedom. This
has boosted entrepreneurial activities, growth, prosperity, and social well-being for
a long time. Remarkably, the most developed economies are the most diverse ones
(and vice versa).
53
New critique of the “freedom of decision-making” comes from some neurobiologists.
54 Their experiments suggest that the feeling of free decision-making arises
after the decision was actually made in the brain. However, this does not prove
anything. Decision, execution and conscious recognition are separate things.
55 The
feeling of having taken a free decision might be just a conscious confirmation of
execution.
Of course, our decisions are often influenced by external factors. However, the
old idea of behavioralism that people would be programmed like a computer (by
education and other external influences such as public media) and that they would
execute what they have been programmed for has failed long ago.
There is little doubt that most people can learn to take different decisions in identical situations (if they are not in a deprived state). A conscious decision resulting
from a deliberation process compares possible alternatives from a variety of perspectives, before a decision is made. In a sense, it is the art of decision-making to consider
many aspects that might matter, and some people are very good at simulating possible
decision outcomes in their brain.
From a societal perspective, it does not matter much whether different decision
outcomes in practically identical situations are the consequence of free will, randomness, or other mechanisms (such as “deterministic chaos” or “turbulence”). What
really matters is to have socio-economic institutions that support innovation and the
spreading of good ideas.
To solve the world’s problems and adapt to environmental, social, economic and
technological change, we must increase our problem solving capacity. We must get
more efficient in taking the best ideas on board and combining them, in other words,
to catalyze collective intelligence. It turns out that countries supporting individual
freedom are better at boosting new ideas (see the green bars in Fig. 4.2), while others
are better at applying them (red bars).
53 Hidalgo et al. [12].
54 Neuroscience of free will, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_free_will; also see
http://www.wired.com/2014/09/belief-free-will-threatened-neuroscience/.
55 This becomes clear when we consider the example of a boss who asks his or her staff to do a
certain job and to report back after execution.
79
people would be sent to prison not for wrongdoing, but for disturbing public order.
There would be also no freedom of press. However, in such a framework, business
leaders and policy-makers couldn’t take any decisions as well. We would just have
to accept what is happening to us.
In other cultures, it is being recognized that people can make their own decisions, but everyone is expected to subordinate personal decisions to the interests
of higher-level institutions or to those who are more powerful. Such societies are
hierarchically organized. Compared to this, in Western democracies the power of
people and institutions has been limited by law in favor of individual freedom. This
has boosted entrepreneurial activities, growth, prosperity, and social well-being for
a long time. Remarkably, the most developed economies are the most diverse ones
(and vice versa).
53
New critique of the “freedom of decision-making” comes from some neurobiologists.
54 Their experiments suggest that the feeling of free decision-making arises
after the decision was actually made in the brain. However, this does not prove
anything. Decision, execution and conscious recognition are separate things.
55 The
feeling of having taken a free decision might be just a conscious confirmation of
execution.
Of course, our decisions are often influenced by external factors. However, the
old idea of behavioralism that people would be programmed like a computer (by
education and other external influences such as public media) and that they would
execute what they have been programmed for has failed long ago.
There is little doubt that most people can learn to take different decisions in identical situations (if they are not in a deprived state). A conscious decision resulting
from a deliberation process compares possible alternatives from a variety of perspectives, before a decision is made. In a sense, it is the art of decision-making to consider
many aspects that might matter, and some people are very good at simulating possible
decision outcomes in their brain.
From a societal perspective, it does not matter much whether different decision
outcomes in practically identical situations are the consequence of free will, randomness, or other mechanisms (such as “deterministic chaos” or “turbulence”). What
really matters is to have socio-economic institutions that support innovation and the
spreading of good ideas.
To solve the world’s problems and adapt to environmental, social, economic and
technological change, we must increase our problem solving capacity. We must get
more efficient in taking the best ideas on board and combining them, in other words,
to catalyze collective intelligence. It turns out that countries supporting individual
freedom are better at boosting new ideas (see the green bars in Fig. 4.2), while others
are better at applying them (red bars).
53 Hidalgo et al. [12].
54 Neuroscience of free will, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_free_will; also see
http://www.wired.com/2014/09/belief-free-will-threatened-neuroscience/.
55 This becomes clear when we consider the example of a boss who asks his or her staff to do a
certain job and to report back after execution.