Determined: A Science of Life without Free Will

The ethical and legal implications of determinism are arguably the most important subject in Determined. The theme is introduced in the first chapter, and the first half of the book, which is devoted to arguing that all events, including human behaviors, are deterministic, is used to support the second portion, which discusses the implication of that determinism. Sapolsky’s main point, which he often repeats, is that it is unjustifiable to hold people morally responsible because there’s no such thing as free will. Once he makes this point, Sapolsky turns his focus to the need for major societal changes, identifying potential biases, demonstrating that such change has happened, and presenting potential methods of incorporating free will skepticism into social structures.

Sapolsky openly admits that fully accepting that there is no free will is challenging. The sense of free will is likely an evolved trait, he says, and it has been demonstrated in near-human relatives including chimpanzees. Evolved psychological traits can be overcome through recognition and adaptation. Another challenging aspect lies in potential bias—those with happier, more successful lives may struggle to accept that their positive outcomes are not a result of their free will. Sapolsky identifies a social bias here, suggesting that privilege can skew one’s perspective: “You are privileged enough to have success in life that was not of your own doing, and to cloak yourself with myths of freely willed choices” (392).

Sapolsky argues that when people become skeptical of free will, the world becomes a better place. Examples of such progress can already be seen on a smaller scale in the shift in public opinion toward individuals with epilepsy, schizophrenia, autism, and mental health conditions and other behavior-related traits, like gender and sexuality. Whereas people were once blamed and punished for these behaviors, it is now generally accepted that such behaviors are not chosen. This shift in attitude has resulted in a kinder, more tolerant society. Sapolsky’s point is simple: “We can do lots more of the same” (340). While widespread free will skepticism would change numerous aspects of society, Sapolsky focuses on the justice system, which is a formalized institution designed to morally judge individuals and pass sentences. If human behavior is deterministic and free will is a myth, then it is unethical to morally judge people, and the current justice system is unjustifiable. Levy’s quarantine model is presented as a viable alternative—dangerous individuals should be minimally constrained to protect the majority. This method would eliminate moral judgment while promoting public safety; it would also work to identify and correct the underlying causes of antisocial behavior, such as poverty and discrimination.

The ethical and legal implications of determinism are intended to have a humbling effect. Sapolsky writes, “The only possible moral conclusion is that you are no more entitled to have your needs and desires met than any other human. There is no human who is less worthy than you to have their well-being considered” (402). The purpose of the theme, and of the text itself, is to inspire not only humility but also unity. It argues that all humans are fundamentally equal, and it provides hope for a more empathetic and humane future.