1,721,075 research outputs found
The functional role of free-will illusion in cognition: “The Bignetti Model”
No full textAbstractWhen performing a voluntary action the agent is firmly convinced that he has freely decided to perform it. This raises two questions: “Is this subjective perception of free will (FW) an illusion?” and “Does it serve a useful purpose?”. The answers are tentatively given by “The “Bignetti Model” (TBM) as follows: (1) The so called “voluntary” action is decided and performed by the agent’s unconscious mind (UM) by means of probabilistic responses to inner and outer stimuli; (2) After a slight delay, the agent becomes aware of the ongoing action through feedback signals (somatosensory, etc.) that are conveyed to the brain as a consequence of its performance. Thus, the agent’s conscious mind (CM) always lags behind unconscious activity; (3) Owing to this delay, the CM cannot know the unconscious work that preceeds awareness, thus the CM erroneously believes it has freely decided the action. Though objectively false, this belief is subjectively perceived as true (FW illusion). It is so persistent and deep-rooted in the mind that the CM is unwilling to abandon it; (4) The FW illusion satisfies a psychological need to secure the arousal of the senses of agency (SoA) and of responsibility (SoR) of the action. Both SoA and SoR inevitably lead the CM to self-attribute reward or blame depending on action performance and outcome; (5) Both reward and blame are motivational incentives which foster learning and memory in the CM; the updating of knowledge will provide new information and the skill required for further action (restart from point 1)
Free Will is the illusionary by-product of Self-perception
No full textAbstract: Unconsciuos neural events appear to anticipate voluntary actions by hundreds of msecs (Libet, 1999, 2004; Soon et al.,2008). The impact of such timing on Self-perception and Free Will (FW) is discussed. Libet's model accounts for a delayed conscious action in order to allow a possible voluntary veto. Although, no one veto was recorded, the role of FW still stands unchallenged in Libet's perspective. Up to us, the paradox is that even the veto should account for a neural event! Our feeling is that, in the West, the idea that FW was donated by God as a tool of self-control is a paradox. If we go East, with few exceptions, we can experience an opposite perspective. By meditating, our holy essence is realized as well as our FW illusion is disclosed. In Samkhya metaphor, all is moved by Prakriti (unconscious nature), however, Purusha (conscious mind) steals the role of and pretends to decide instead of Prakriti. According to this perspective, Bignetti's model (Bignetti 2001, 2003, 2004) is proposing that our unconscious mind first reacts against a stimulus by choosing some chaotic ideas within the memory store. Then, the events in their due course, draw the attention of our conscious mind, thus causing the arousal of Self-perception. Since we become aware of what's happening only when Self-perception is lightened, we miss the unconscious events occurred few msecs before. That's why we always deceive ourselves about FW existence. Consciousness can learn from the outcome of an action but cannot decide it
Alcool deidrogenasi di fegato di cavallo: studio cinetico dell'ossidazione dell'alcool benzilico in condizioni di stato stazionario
No full text
- …
