When I went to see "A Clockwork Orange" (a part of the Philosophy & Film series) the other night, I went with my friends Justin and Henry. The day after, Henry had sent me an e-mail, and so I wrote him back. It covers a few of the issues I was to thinking about with regard to the movie (like free will). Allow me to present that e-conversation...
****************************************
Quoting Henry.Huang@colorado.edu:
Hey Sonja,
I just wanted to share some ideas. During the discussion, some people say Alex (the main character) is a free agent, and some say he's a 'machine' the entire time and just got reprogrammed a few times into a different machine. Whenever someone went along with one side, the prof or someone else seemed to have a point that contradicts the viewpoint. Everyone seemed to accept that we are only dealing with two agents: the free agent with no morals and the machine with morals. I actually believe in the possibility of two more 'semi-agents.' I think there can exist a free agent that acts LIKE a machine, and there can also exist a machine that acts LIKE a free agent.
Before I explain this more, I first must admit that I'm a little confused about your prof's definition of 'machine.' Does the machine by definition lack consciousness? I know there's a lot of debate about whether robots can have consciousness, but right now I have a feeling that this is impossible. I think robots can be highly sophisticated, but never reach true intelligence like humans. This might be an example of a machine that acts LIKE a free agent. Notice that I'm kind of assuming that humans are free agents (which I sort of justify with quantum physics). ANYWAYS, going back to my idea of these semi-agents. I think it could be argued that Alex is initially a free agent who later becomes a semi-agent (namely, the semi-free-agent who acts like a machine). He appears to be a machine because he SEEMS to have no choice. It could be argued that he does indeed have choice, only he's prevented from acting on the 'bad ones' because he's been conditioned to feel sick during those times. The scene that stands out is when Alex is confronted with the naked lady. Clearly he desired to touch her, but that sick feeling stopped him from going further. The idea that we're all just machines is certainly very convincing. The words 'conditioned' and 'reprogrammed' are often used interchangibly and are associated with machines. The argument against mine is that Alex has been conditioned since he was born to act the way he does; therefore he's a machine. My counter-argument is that perhaps he is born a free agent who is constantly being conditioned by his environment; the conditioning Alex gets can place him a step closer to being LIKE a machine. However, he'll always remain a free agent. Sorry this is a bit longer than I expected. Does this make sense? It's the best answer I could come up with so far that satisfies the contradictory points. Keep in mind I'm no philosopher, and there could be something fundamentally flawed in my argument. I'm also no scientist either! If you'd like you can tell this to your prof. I'd be curious how he'd tear apart my ideas!
Henry
Hey Henry,
Interesting ideas.
The idea of a 'semi-agent' seems a little ambiguous to me. Could you explain that a little more?
Also the definition of "machine" seems ambiguous. What exactly *is* a machine? Just something that's been programmed in some manner? With that definition, I would argue that anything can be a machine...even a flower! Because a flower is biologically "programmed" (so to speak) to need certain things: CO2, water, sun and the chemicals from it (and there's no changing that programming, unless we were in some sort of futuristic, technologically-advanced society in which we could change the basic needs of things)... And it's also programmed to be a certain way: rooted in the ground, petals opening at a certain time of year, and so on. In a similar way, I would argue that each human has certain biological programming from the very beginnings of their lives. Instincts and drives, and personality traits (arguably) like compassion. Then, as humans go on throughout our lives, the society we live in influences us, as do the people directly around us, most notably our parents and friends (this is called the social constructionist perspective).
I too think that Alex has ability to choose, he just cannot act on some of the choices he decides. Does 'choice' imply action? I don't think it does. Desires (like wanting to touch the naked woman, and wanting to hit the man who was renting his room, and probably wanting to defend himself against his attackers, although that point wasn't as obvious in the movie) and thoughts are choices as well, and of this Alex was perfectly capable.
I think Alex was born a free agent in the sense that anyone is born a free agent (again I'm referring to biological influences), and remained one to some extent (though to different extents throughout the movie, i.e. everyone is socially conditioned throughout their lives, and he is too, and later, after the first treatment he had choice without ability to act on that choice) throughout the movie. Whether you call the victim of this limited freedom 'free agent' or 'machine' is a matter of diction/semantics. I might agree with you and call it 'free agent,' at least until he undergoes the treatment...then it's arguable how much free will one needs to have to be 'free.' While I previously said I think Alex has the ability to choose (and I continue to think that), I personally wouldn't say that Alex is a free agent after either procedure that is done to him. Why? Because historically, and typically, when free will is thought of, action is involved AS WELL AS desire and thought (and other emotional processes).
Some other things to consider in terms of the restriction of free will are laws, inabilities to do things (Like flying), and again, biology and socialization (You may disagree with me in my stance that we are free (or, to borrow your term, semi-free)agents despite those limitations).
WOULD total and complete free will look like anarchy? How would choice even be able to be made without biology and socialization?! Suppose we really are 'blank slates.' What would that look like???
Sonja
