Free to choose what you do and make decisions?

可以自由選擇做什麼和做決定？

Or are you an NPC, unable to decide anything for yourself?

還是說你是一個 NPC，不能為自己做任何決定？

You feel that you have control over your life, or at least, what you'll have for breakfast.

你覺得自己可以控制自己的生活，至少可以控制早餐吃什麼。

But this may be an illusion.

但這可能只是一種假象。

Physics actually may force you to go through life as if on rails, with no free will at all.

物理學實際上可能迫使你像在軌道上一樣度過一生，完全沒有自由意志。

You experience free will all the time, like when you decided to watch this video instead of doing something useful.

你無時無刻不在體驗著自由意志，比如你決定看這段視頻，而不是做一些有用的事情。

Free will is your ability to decide by yourself what you do.

自由意志是你自己決定做什麼的能力。

It means that the future is an open arena that you can shape with your actions.

這意味著未來是一個開放的舞臺，你可以用自己的行動來塑造它。

It's at the core of human relationships.

這是人際關係的核心。

It means you are responsible for your actions, which is the basis of our moral and legal systems.

這意味著你要為自己的行為負責，這是我們道德和法律體系的基礎。

There are too many dimensions for one short video.

一個簡短的視頻可以涵蓋太多方面。

Moral, psychological, biological.

道德、心理、生物

So we'll focus on the most essential part.

是以，我們將重點關注最重要的部分。

Is free will even possible?

自由意志到底有沒有可能？

Two main philosophical camps are fighting about this.

兩大哲學陣營正在為此爭論不休。

No matter how we represent them, they'll be upset about it.

無論我們如何代表他們，他們都會對此感到不滿。

So we'll use our own words.

所以，我們要用自己的話。

The first camp claims that the very idea of free will is fundamentally incompatible with the laws of the universe.

第一陣營聲稱，自由意志的觀念從根本上說與宇宙法則是不相容的。

You are an NPC.

你是一個 NPC。

Whatever you exactly are, it's somehow made up of your physical brain and body.

無論你是什麼，它都是由你的大腦和身體組成的。

And these are made of cells, which are made of proteins, which are made of atoms and particles like protons or electrons.

細胞由蛋白質組成，蛋白質由原子和質子或電子等粒子組成。

So fundamentally, you're a specific, quite lovely, dynamic pacet of particles.

所以從根本上說，你是一個特定的、相當可愛的、動態的粒子群。

Particles have no will, no motivation, no freedom.

粒子沒有意志，沒有動力，沒有自由。

They blindly follow the laws of physics.

他們盲目地遵循物理定律。

And we don't know why, but most laws of physics are deterministic, which means that things happen the way they do because of the things that came before.

我們不知道為什麼，但大多數物理定律都是確定性的，也就是說，事情之所以會這樣發生，是因為之前的事情已經發生了。

If you play pool and hit a ball at a specific speed and angle, the laws of physics tell you exactly how all the balls on the table will behave.

如果你打撞球，以特定的速度和角度擊球，物理定律會準確地告訴你桌上所有球的表現。

Their speed, recoil directions, everything.

它們的速度、後坐力方向，應有盡有。

These laws completely decide the behavior of all balls on the table.

這些法則完全決定了桌上所有球的行為。

At the microscopic level, things work very much like that, only without players.

在微觀層面上，事情的運作非常類似，只是沒有球員。

Actions and reactions affect all the particles in the universe, creating a chain of causal effects that extends throughout time from the past to the future.

行動和反應會影響宇宙中的所有粒子，產生一連串的因果效應，從過去延伸到未來。

Things happen, making other things happen.

事情發生了，其他事情也隨之發生。

Now imagine that if right after the Big Bang, a super smart supercomputer looked at every single particle in the universe and noted all their properties.

現在想象一下，如果在宇宙大爆炸之後，一臺超級智能的超級計算機查看了宇宙中的每一個粒子，並記錄下它們的所有特性。

Just by applying the deterministic laws of physics, it should be able to predict what all the particles in existence would be doing until the end of time.

只需應用確定性的物理定律，它就能預測出所有存在的粒子在時間盡頭之前會做什麼。

But if you're made of particles and it's technically possible to calculate what particles will do forever, then you never decided anything.

但是，如果你是由粒子組成的，而且技術上可以計算出粒子將永遠做什麼，那麼你就從來沒有決定過什麼。

Your past, present, and future were already predetermined and decided at the Big Bang.

你的過去、現在和未來在宇宙大爆炸時就已註定。

That would mean there is a kind of fate, and you are not free to decide anything.

這就意味著存在一種命運，你無法自由決定任何事情。

You may feel like you make decisions, but you're actually on autopilot.

你可能覺得自己在做決定，但實際上你是在自動駕駛。

The motions of the particles that make up your brain cells that made you watch this video were decided 14 billion years ago.

讓你觀看這段視頻的腦細胞的粒子運動是在 140 億年前決定的。

You're just in the room when it happens.

事情發生時，你就在房間裡。

You're only witnessing how the universe inside you unfolds in real time.

你只是在見證你體內的宇宙是如何實時展開的。

But this can't be true because of quantum mechanics, right?

但由於量子力學的原因，這不可能是真的，對嗎？

Quantum processes are intrinsically random, not deterministic, and can't be predicted with total certainty.

量子過程本質上是隨機的，而非確定的，無法完全確定地預測。

On the quantum pool table, balls can go randomly left or up or banana.

在量子檯球桌上，球可以隨意向左、向上或向下滾動。

Their behavior isn't set by what came before, but randomly decided in real time.

他們的行為不是由之前的行為決定的，而是實時隨機決定的。

But for the no free will camp, this doesn't affect their argument.

但對於沒有自由意志的陣營來說，這並不影響他們的論點。

They think that since quantum processes are random, they don't allow you to make any decisions.

他們認為，既然量子過程是隨機的，就不允許你做出任何決定。

Because if there's randomness for the things that fundamentally make up your brain and body, these random processes make the decisions for you.

因為如果構成大腦和身體的基本要素存在隨機性，那麼這些隨機過程就會為你做出決定。

How?

怎麼做？

Say an electron can randomly go right or left.

假設一個電子可以隨機向右或向左移動。

If it goes left, it triggers electric currents between your neurons that create a neuronal process, which triggers a long chain of actions that make you watch a YouTube video.

如果它向左移動，就會在你的神經元之間觸發電流，產生神經元過程，從而觸發一長串動作，讓你觀看 YouTube 視頻。

Or it goes right and makes you clean your room.

否則，它就會讓你打掃房間。

Just because the chain is extremely complex doesn't mean you have any control over it.

鏈條極其複雜並不意味著你能控制它。

So maybe your fate was not decided at the Big Bang, but it is decided at this very moment.

是以，也許你的命運不是在宇宙大爆炸時決定的，但此時此刻已經決定了。

The important part is that it's not decided by you.

重要的是，這不是由你決定的。

You get no say in this.

你沒有發言權。

You have no free will.

你沒有自由意志

Wow.

哇

This is kind of a bummer because the argument fundamentally seems to make sense.

這有點令人掃興，因為從根本上說，這個論點似乎是有道理的。

Except, no, screams the free will side.

不，不，自由意志一方在尖叫。

This is a really bad way to think about the universe.

這種思考宇宙的方式真的很糟糕。

You are the main character.

你就是主角。

We know that we can reduce everything that exists to its basic particles and the laws that guide them.

我們知道，我們可以將存在的一切還原為基本粒子和指導它們的定律。

While this makes physics feel like the only scientific discipline that actually matters, there's a problem.

雖然這讓人覺得物理學是唯一一門真正重要的科學學科，但這也存在一個問題。

You can't explain everything in our universe only in terms of particles.

你不能只用粒子來解釋我們宇宙中的一切。

One key fact about reality that we can't explain by looking just at electrons and quantum stuff is emergence.

僅從電子和量子的角度來看，我們無法解釋現實中的一個關鍵事實，那就是 "湧現"。

Emergence is when many small things together create new fundamental traits that didn't exist before.

新出現是指許多小事物共同創造出以前不存在的新的基本特徵。

A drop of water is just a sextillion H2O molecules.

一滴水就是六千萬個 H2O 分子。

If you get water on your pants, they get wet.

如果褲子上沾了水，褲子就會溼。

But what is wetness?

但什麼是溼潤呢？

H2O molecules are not wet, but your pants are definitely wet now.

H2O 分子沒有溼，但你的褲子現在肯定溼了。

Many small things together just created something new that doesn't exist at the level of the individual molecules.

許多小東西結合在一起，就創造出了新的東西，而這些東西在單個分子的層面上是不存在的。

Emergence occurs at all levels of reality, and reality seems to be organized in layers.

新現象發生在現實的各個層面，而現實似乎是分層組織的。

Atoms, molecules, cells, tissues, organs, you, society.

原子、分子、細胞、組織、器官、你、社會。

Put many things in one layer together, and they'll create the next layer up.

把許多東西放在一層，它們就會形成下一層。

Every time they do, entirely new properties emerge.

每當他們這樣做時，就會出現全新的特性。

One atom can't handle information, but many of them together can form a DNA molecule.

一個原子無法處理資訊，但許多原子聚在一起就能形成 DNA 分子。

Molecules are not alive, but many of them can form a cell, and cells are alive.

分子沒有生命，但許多分子可以組成細胞，而細胞是有生命的。

With each jump up the complexity ladder, the rules of what's possible change.

隨著複雜性階梯的每一次攀升，可能的規則也會隨之改變。

Completely new things emerge that are much more than the sum of their parts.

嶄新的事物不斷湧現，遠遠超出了各部分的總和。

And here, the reductionist view of the universe breaks down.

在這裡，還原論的宇宙觀被打破了。

The layers of reality need each other to make sense.

現實的各層次需要相互關聯，才有意義。

You can explain living things with cells, cells with molecules, and molecules with atoms.

你可以用細胞來解釋生物，用分子來解釋細胞，用原子來解釋分子。

But because of emergence, you can't start with quantum particles and reconstruct the universe.

但由於出現的原因，你無法從量子粒子開始重建宇宙。

You can't explain galaxies with quantum mechanics, or human psychology with quarks.

你無法用量子力學解釋星系，也無法用夸克解釋人類心理。

This is not the whole story.

這並不是故事的全部。

Reality is not just structured in layers, but for some reason, the layers are also largely independent of each other.

現實不僅是分層結構的，而且由於某種原因，各層在很大程度上也是相互獨立的。

Things existing within the same layer can influence each other, and maybe a layer up or down.

同一層中的事物可以相互影響，也可以影響上一層或下一層。

But often, they don't seem to influence things much higher up or down.

但很多時候，他們似乎並不能影響更高層次或更低層次的事情。

To figure out how your organs work, you don't need quarks.

要弄清你的器官是如何工作的，你並不需要夸克。

To understand politics, you don't need to know about cells.

要了解政治，你不需要了解細胞。

If you want to explain things happening on one layer, you can only do that by staying close to that layer.

如果你想解釋某一層發生的事情，你只能緊緊圍繞這一層來解釋。

No, screams the no-free-will camp in frustration.

不，無自由意志陣營沮喪地叫道。

You can't just use magic to explain free will.

你不能只用魔法來解釋自由意志。

But the emergence argument doesn't invoke magic.

但是，"湧現 "論證並沒有使用魔法。

It just says that thinking about free will in terms of determinism and fundamental laws is a dead end.

它只是說，用決定論和基本規律來思考自由意志是一條死衚衕。

A kind of category error, like trying to explain galaxies by looking at your digestive tract.

這是一種分類錯誤，就像試圖通過觀察你的消化道來解釋星系一樣。

It's part of a reductionist school of thinking about the universe that very successfully shaped science for a long time, but that's challenged by emergence.

這是一種關於宇宙的還原論思維流派的一部分，這種思維流派在很長一段時間內成功地塑造了科學，但卻受到了新出現的挑戰。

So maybe trying to understand free will by looking at fundamental particles, deterministic laws, and quantum mechanics misses the point.

是以，試圖通過觀察基本粒子、確定性法則和量子力學來理解自由意志，也許是毫無意義的。

The question we should be asking is, which layer of reality is relevant to free will?

我們應該問的問題是：哪一層現實與自由意志有關？

Well, just like no individual molecule creates wetness, not a single cell in your brain wants to watch YouTube.

就像沒有一個分子會製造溼氣一樣，你大腦中也沒有一個細胞想看 YouTube。

But one layer up, your brain made of 80 billion interconnected neurons does.

但再往上一層，由 800 億個相互連接的神經元組成的大腦就能做到這一點。

On this layer, all the things relevant to you emerge.

在這一層，所有與你相關的事物都會出現。

Your consciousness, character, feelings, your fears, and dreams.

你的意識、性格、情感、恐懼和夢想。

This is where you emerge.

這就是你出現的地方。

We don't know why and how, but we know that you're here right now.

我們不知道為什麼，也不知道如何做到，但我們知道你現在就在這裡。

How all the things going on in your brain play off each other to make you who you are is a whole different can of worms.

大腦中發生的所有事情如何相互影響，從而造就了現在的你，這完全是另一回事。

But on this layer of reality, you are part of the decision process.

但在現實這一層，你是決策過程的一部分。

Because at this level, you are just one more physical cause of whatever happens in your brain.

因為在這個層面上，你只是大腦中發生的任何事情的又一個物理原因。

You are shaped by your decisions, and your decisions are shaped by you.

你的決定決定了你，你的決定決定了你。

You have a say about this layer of reality.

你對這層現實有發言權。

You are not just witnessing how the universe inside you unfolds, you're actually taking part in it.

你不僅僅是在見證你體內的宇宙是如何展開的，你實際上也在參與其中。

And you're free to do so however you see fit.

你可以自由選擇你認為合適的方式。

At least, this is how some on the free will side see it.

至少，自由意志一方的一些人是這麼認為的。

Conclusion and opinion.

結論和意見。

So, who's right?

那麼，誰是對的？

Is there free will?

有自由意志嗎？

We don't know.

我們不知道。

If you ask us personally, we think the argument for free will is more appealing, because it brings the complexity of the universe to the table.

如果你問我們個人，我們認為自由意志的論點更有吸引力，因為它帶來了宇宙的複雜性。

Maybe existence is just the sum of its parts, but at least for now, it seems the universe is not that simple.

也許存在只是各部分的總和，但至少現在看來，宇宙並沒有那麼簡單。

But even if we don't have free will, it's not clear what that changes for practical purposes.

但是，即使我們沒有自由意志，我們也不清楚自由意志會改變什麼。

You and us, we humans, on a purely subjective basis, feel like we have free will, and that your decisions are yours to make.

你和我們，我們人類，在純主觀的基礎上，覺得自己有自由意志，你的決定是你自己做的。

As long as we're not sure either way, and if it feels like you're making decisions, what does it matter if a non-existent supercomputer could have calculated the future at the Big Bang?

只要我們不能確定哪種方式，只要你感覺是在做決定，那麼即使一臺不存在的超級計算機在宇宙大爆炸時就能計算出未來，又有什麼關係呢？

Or if quantum stuff all the way down randomly nudges yourselves one way or the other?

或者說，如果量子的東西一直在隨機地向你們這邊或那邊推移？

Free will that feels free is good enough for us.

對我們來說，感覺自由的自由意志就足夠了。

In any case, now you can decide what to do next.

無論如何，現在你可以決定下一步該怎麼做了。

Maybe get some stuff done, or watch more of our videos.

也許可以做一些事情，或者多看看我們的視頻。

It's your decision, probably.

也許這是你的決定。

At least you can pick which video to watch next, in theory.

至少從理論上講，你可以選擇下一個要看的視頻。

What you have really almost no control over is how the state of the world is presented to you in the news.

你幾乎無法控制的是新聞如何向你展示世界的現狀。

Algorithms are constantly working behind the scenes to decide which information to show you, and alarmist headlines get amplified over straightforward reporting.

算法不斷在幕後工作，決定向你展示哪些資訊，危言聳聽的標題比直截了當的報道更容易被放大。

But Ground News, the sponsor of this video, can give you back a feeling of independence.

但是，本視頻的贊助商 Ground News 可以讓您重新找回獨立的感覺。

They gather related news articles from around the world in one place, so you can compare coverage.

它們將世界各地的相關新聞文章彙集到一個地方，這樣您就可以對報道進行比較。

For example, last month the UK government passed a bill to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda.

例如，上個月英國政府通過了一項將尋求庇護者驅逐到盧旺達的法案。

This bill was widely covered by more than 150 news sources around the world.

全球 150 多個新聞來源對該法案進行了廣泛報道。

And using the Ground News blind spot feed, you can see how this event is being framed by both sides of the political spectrum, instead of one side that an algorithm has decided you align with.

使用 "地面新聞盲點"，你可以看到這一事件是如何被政治光譜的兩邊所描述的，而不是算法決定你所支持的一邊。

Right-leaning sources focus on the idea that migrants are continuing to cross the channel, despite the bill's attempt to act as a deterrent, while left-leaning sources focus on human rights groups' opposition to the bill.

右翼消息來源的重點是，儘管該法案試圖起到威懾作用，但移民仍在繼續穿越海峽；而左翼消息來源的重點則是人權組織對該法案的反對。

This way you can compare different viewpoints from all over the world, see how the story and coverage change, and be better equipped to engage in constructive dialogue with those who hold different views.

這樣，您就可以比較世界各地的不同觀點，瞭解報道和報道方式的變化，並更好地與持不同觀點的人進行建設性對話。

Go to ground.news.com to give it a try.

請訪問 ground.news.com 試試看。

If you sign up through this link, you'll get 40% off the unlimited access plan.

如果您通過此鏈接註冊，您將獲得無限訪問計劃 40% 的折扣。

We think they do an important job.

我們認為他們的工作很重要。

If you're not completely free in your decision to stop scrolling, at least take control over what occupies your mind.

如果你不能完全自由地決定停止滾動，至少也要控制一下佔據你思想的東西。

To help you make the most of your life, we've created a curiosity guide that will take you on epic adventures to change your perspective on the world.

為了幫助您充分利用生命，我們製作了一份好奇心指南，帶您進行史詩般的探險，改變您對世界的看法。