Rian Nejar's Blog, page 17

A Group of Twelve Angry, Gullible, Violent Men

An excerpt from “Humbling and Humility“

The Group

Sid greeted the gathered bunch of morose men in one of the small windowless session rooms. The room had chairs around three sides, a large whiteboard on one wall, with a door in a corner and a television set in the other corner. Sid asked that we begin introducing ourselves, providing some background of our origin, and the sorry circumstances that brought us into his counseling program.

Levi hailed from the state of Israel. A tall, lanky, dark haired, olive complexioned young feller, identifiably Middle Eastern, who seemed somewhat reticent and subdued, and yet talked forcefully. Married into a Middle Eastern family in America, he fought with his wife, fell afoul of the law, and with us in counseling. Tony was a short, Hispanic, older man hailing from just south of the border, from Mexico. He was sent to the program for beating his teenage son. Fred, a friendly middle-aged Caucasian, was kicked out of his home, with his guns, after his wife closed a garage door on his hand, leading to many unflattering words and strong disagreement. I introduced myself briefly as one coming from the other side of the globe, India, and in the program for ungentlemanly behavior with my spouse. There were some more in the group whose names and situations did not register in my mind.

Our group was small, to begin with, though quite diverse, and lacking in enthusiasm. No one expected anything interesting out of our sessions ahead.

Sid began a discussion with his description of what he believed to be an expression of freedom protected in American society. ���I am married, but my wife can sleep with anyone she wants to, and I can sleep with anyone I want to.���

Smiles of disbelief from all group members.

���What would you do if you came into your house and saw your wife with another man in bed?��� asked Sid.

���Kill her,��� said Levi, with an immediacy that surprised us.

Fred cheerfully agreed, ���Yes, you can!���

A good few in the group objected to this blatant disregard for life or typical norms of civil society.

Levi persisted in his extreme position. ���Kill her, I’d say.���

Fred laughed. ���Yes, you can. But you’d have to be clever about it; claim that you saw a man attacking your wife in bed, got your gun, and shot at him to protect your wife. Shoot multiple times, and tragically, kill them both.���

Clearly, Fred had been around guns for long, and perhaps had some experience using them with impunity. The candidate for a vice presidential post, who shot a lawyer and campaign contributor under the assumption that the lawyer was prey hiding in the bush (which, you may agree, is an assumption well worth forgiving), came to my mind. The conversation swiftly descended into disagreement, with a good few in the group opposing this judge-jury-executioner approach. Yet something about Fred’s proposed actions rang a bell, resonated in the mind. I couldn’t put my finger on it then. Sid was at a complete loss for words.

Levi clarified further. ���See, I am from Israel, of Palestinian origin. It’s a democracy there too. But that is what I’d do.���

Sid diverted the discussion on to formalities for our sessions, the responsibilities and expectations of participants, etc., and occupied the rest of the session in such matters.

��� ��� ���

SP500 Volatility and Simple Technical Analysis Mid-Jan

Fig. 1: VVIX and VIX divergence for mid-January 2015

The trend, discussed in an earlier post on diminishing market sensitivity, continues…while the market has seen 350+ point swings (2% for the DJI) in the past couple of days. As in Fig. 1 above, VVIX is declining for rising peaks of VIX, the SP500 volatility or fear index. A divergence in market terminology.

I’ll stick with my short-term theory that given diminished sensitivity to fear, VIX too must settle, but must confess to a rising concern with less than impressive quarterly earnings numbers from financial giants such as JP Morgan, and weak retail sales numbers for the past December. An expected upward turn for the market can reverse with rapidity if more earnings numbers (from Bank of America, and Intel Corp. expected Thursday) and forward guidance fall below significantly lowered expectations for earnings growth.

To bolster the expectation of a market rise near-term, here’s the SP500 chart with some technical analysis:

Fig. 2: SP500 Index Plot with Moving Averages and Analysis

As seen in Fig.2 above, the SP500 index has bounced off close to the 100-day simple moving average (SMA) on a good few instances in the past six months. The non-monotonicity of the moving averages convergence divergence (MACD) analysis (in red), at the end of the plot in the past couple of trading sessions, hints at the possibility of its crossing the signal line (9-day exponential moving average of the MACD) upward – a BUY signal in simple technical analysis. This wiggle in the MACD corresponds with the market having opened up strongly positive on Tuesday and being pulled negative by a combination of news and concerns.

Could the SP500 bounce mid-January, given that it is at the 100-day SMA level, and has held above the psychological 2000 level? Perhaps…today’s trading session saw the market fall 2%, and retrace half that fall in the afternoon (an afternoon spurt up in oil price may have something to do with that). A candlestick SP500 plot shows a bottom hammer formation, an indicator of a turnaround. But, in a fearful situation (higher average VIX values) such as the present, negative economic data, or unimpressive earnings numbers, among other factors, can readily overwhelm any of the technical indicators seen, as experienced traders know…

Full Disclosure: I continue to stay short the VIX near-term.

Arrest, Prosecution, and Education: A Humbling Journey Begins

An excerpt from “Humbling and Humility” – the prologue.

Education is the inculcation of the incomprehensible in the indifferent by the incompetent.

���John Maynard Keynes

Walking in, on a pleasant southwest December afternoon, to my court-ordered intervention program, I harbored much resentment for what was to come, and little hope of learning anything useful. This program was the remedy prescribed by a seemingly uncaring judicial system, the great American system of justice, which I fell afoul of by disorderly conduct. It was either this, paid for in addition to court fees and fines, or six months’ residence in a notorious correctional system of the state. That really wasn’t much of a choice. State hospitality in germ-infected facilities, tent camps in the hot desert with rattlesnakes and scorpions for company, and pink underwear designed to attract attention������this could be my lot under Wariduna Sheriff Waspoia’s eminently questionable rules of incarceration. A lose-lose situation, or so I thought, steeling myself to face the re-education mandated.

Being a forty-something first generation immigrant from enchanting India, the largest and most complex democracy by population, where culture and education are given high priority in one’s growth into adulthood, made this unsought inculcation all the more fun.

But that was almost five years ago. Though I’d decided then to document every aspect of that experience, my urge to write remained muted������until the recent arrest and prosecution of another, from my land of origin, by the American justice system. This event awoke buried memories; it also made all the news. The US secretary of state and the Indian prime minister commented on it. Ministers declared procedural war upon American embassy and consular officials in India. The Indian media was agog, with this event in America, and its public backlash at home.

The arrest and strip search, in New York, of an Indian consular officer, a young mother, for alleged offenses of providing false visa information and underpayment of her domestic employee, inflamed her family and countrymen. The event incurred immediate public retaliation, in large vociferous demonstrations, in her nation. Priyavani Cobraghatta’s modesty had been outraged, her consular status disrespected, and America had greatly overstepped its authority, or so claimed her supporters. There was indeed something deeply disturbing about events relating to her arrest; my memories could now no longer be denied expression.

I recall my own deplorable journey through the American justice system. An inexplicable arrest, at night, in my minimal house wear, a harrowing day in state holding, and a struggle to regain my freedom. This was followed by prosecution, by an adversarial district attorney’s office, and defense, of sorts, by Mindy Castle, a lump-sum-fee local lawyer. Priyavani, on the other hand, was prosecuted by a prominent man of the law, Veer Batata, an immigrant hailing from the same land as us, famous for prosecuting and jailing many a captain of industry here. She not only had representation from a New York lawyer, a good few ministers and politicians spoke for her through raucous Indian media, and communication channels between the two administrations. There could, surely, be no similarity in how she and I proceeded through our legal processes.

But did either of us learn something, anything, from all that transpired? There is one thing vividly common, nevertheless; all I wanted to do, when subjected to the system and its processes, was surrender my citizenship and leave, and I imagine all she wanted to do was to be relieved of her assignment, and official role here in America, and leave. But there ends any such parallel. Priyavani did leave in short order, free from prosecution or accountability for her actions in the land. I, on the other hand, continued with the process in this large and powerful democracy of the world.

It is harder yet to bring up memories of my crime that led to my encounter of the most unpleasant kind with the system here. I stood accused of assault and disorderly conduct with no specifics on what constituted assault on my part. But that is how this system works, as discovered in time in my prosecution and re-education. An unwanted contact, a pull of the arm, even a poke with a finger can be termed assault by honorable enforcers of the law, as officer Gormon Grigorevic of the town of Dilbut did with me. They will then search high and low for any evidence they can employ to buttress such a charge.

Does truth really matter to such enforcers in these strange circumstances? Do they pause to consider the devastating impact their actions may have on a person and family’s future? I hoped to discover empathy as I went through the process������and perhaps also comprehend some of my failings. A sense of outrage, much like that expressed by so many supporters of Priyavani, had welled up within me then.

My attempts to talk to those involved in the process seemed of no avail. I felt then, overwhelmingly, that this legal system condemned me as a criminal and only cared to dispose of me. I would only be another conviction the state won against undesirable elements falling into its grasp. It had been a most turbulent period in life for me. As I resigned myself to the system and its cursory resolution, I did accept that my actions expressed a disturbance within. And that I had indeed behaved in an ungentlemanly manner.

��� ��� ���

Empathy, Sympathy, and Accountability: The Drawbridge Story

The Drawbridge story: An excerpt from “Humbling and Humility“

Responsibility and Accountability

In the next class, after the usual roll call and payments, Sid said he wanted to talk about responsibility. He took an example, that of a Baron and Baroness, with the Baroness involved in a clandestine love affair������the old Drawbridge Exercise you can find in a quick search online.

Briefly, when the busy Baron was away on his duties, the lonely Baroness ignored his dire warning to her to not leave the castle while he was away. She left to spend time with her clandestine lover in the village, instructing her servants to leave a drawbridge to the castle������which stood on an island in a wide river������lowered until she returned. After many pleasurable hours with her lover, she returned to find the drawbridge blocked by an armed gatekeeper. He implored her to not cross the drawbridge because the Baron had ordered him to kill her if she did so.

To enter the castle without crossing the drawbridge, the Baroness asked her lover for help. But the lover, claiming they shared only a romantic relationship, denied her the needed assistance in her time of peril. She then begged a boatman for help, who demanded money for his services, and a friend, who took a moral stance, against her, since she had disobeyed the Baron. Everyone she approached thus proved unhelpful.

She eventually returned to the drawbridge and crossed it on her own. Despite her fervent pleas to the gatekeeper to spare her life, he killed her as the Baron had ordered him to.

The exercise involved listing, by decreasing culpability, those responsible for the Baroness’s death. Sid simplified the task, for those among us who did not want to evaluate shades of responsibility, and asked us only to identify who we thought most responsible. It felt strange that in a counseling session, for domestic violence, the instructional exercise used was one of extreme violence and assignment of blame.

Nevertheless, the group got to it and we tallied votes. The Baron got nine votes in all as the most responsible, while the gatekeeper got four votes. Jim, our leg-in-a-cast member, gave the Baroness his vote. What registered in my mind then was only that there were fourteen group members in all, not counting Sid. But some are more easily remembered, while some just shrink into their places, barely touching the group’s collective consciousness. The general trend of votes was as expected, that the Baron, for planning and ordering that the deed be done was considered most responsible, and the gatekeeper was also held responsible as the perpetrator.

Only one in the group, Jim, held the Baroness responsible, which was interesting. Despite her infidelity, and lack of respect for her husband’s wishes, it appeared that the majority empathized with her. I could only think that must have been due to the tragic nature of what had befallen her, and not really a rational analysis of what led to the tragedy. Sympathy overrules cold rationale readily. The test seemed more about judging one’s human responses. Opportunists would perhaps align with Jim, and push blame onto one to whom it wouldn’t matter any more, so everyone wins. Why fret over what is past?

���The one who seems none the worse here is the Baroness’s lover,��� said I, as we discussed the exercise. ���He enjoyed what he chose to, and took no additional responsibility. Though his actions lacked what we may call conscience, he is the least affected, so long as he is not discovered.���

Laughter all around, and general agreement.

Paul spoke up, ���Being the lover is the easiest thing to do, maybe the best in today’s culture. Take what you can, and run������or cut your losses, and run.���

Sid tried to redirect the discussion toward taking responsibility. ���There are consequences��� The lover may not be in any committed relationship������

No one paid heed to what Sid said. You could say that the exercise did not produce a specific result he was hoping for.

��� ��� ���

Emotions, State Intervention, and Cultural Differences

An excerpt from “Humbling and Humility,” and related scientific research on emotions:

My intake counselor was personable enough. He asked me to describe the series of events which led me to this private establishment that employed him. Uncomfortable over answering the questionnaire, I described events as briefly as I could––a domestic argument with my spouse that became somewhat physical––and asked him instead why anger is something the state appears to require suppression of, while not providing any remedies for circumstances that lead to anger. Sid––the counselor––pointed out that anger leads to violence, and that then becomes a matter for the state.

“Don’t get mad, get even––isn’t this a common saying here in the west?” I asked. “What do you think will happen, in crowded nations like India, if everyone worked to get even instead of getting mad and venting out anger?”

“There would be chaos,” replied Sid, giving me a curious look. “But conditions here are different. We have courts to help us resolve disagreements.”

“What is the membership of the group I am to join?”

He figured out my oblique question. “All male. Women have separate counseling groups.”

“What about root causes for such domestic disagreements?” I dug deeper into what he helped with. “How do you address free mingling of sexes in the typical workplace, and resulting infidelity?”

Sid spoke with bluntness that caught me unawares: “You are a root cause. These sessions are to address what you can do to change.”

“The state requires a license to begin a family, but does not prosecute infidelity that often destroys a family,” I persisted. “Is this of no concern to the state at all?”

“Some states do that…” he said, with some hesitation.

That was a revelation to me. So the law varied, state by state? How did this come about? I knew that taxes varied, but the law? How are people across the nation equal, if laws do not apply uniformly? Clearly, something new to learn.

“Isn’t it futile to beat on me, a victim?” I asked, continuing my unrelenting drive to question the state’s processes. “One who, despite obvious harm caused by a partner’s infidelity, is trying to bring about a good end result? Is this process just to satisfy the state?”

“It is ninety percent that. You finish the course, and go beat the snot out of your partner––the state can say that they made you go through the course, at least! Cover their behind, in other words.”

Sid seemed in a hurry to finish with me. He explained that he had another appointment to prepare for, a group to counsel. He asked me to meet his colleague, Dave, for an initial orientation, after which I could choose my counseling group and sessions. I sensed that he wasn’t altogether comfortable with having me in his group.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Trading Volatility; 2014 January Over Again?

VVIX with the VIX, 1yr plot with trends of the past month

If you’ve read my post on SP500 technical analysis of the New Year, you did anticipate higher volatility in the past many trading sessions, and perhaps benefited from it. But volatility, like waves on water, rises and falls; the knowing trader rides a wave up, and surfs it down. I think we may be headed into a period of subsiding volatility, and wanted to be sure to provide you with my thoughts.

Volatility whipped up early last year as well, and continued higher toward the end of the month. January provided negative returns (for index funds such as those based on the SP500) in 2014. Will 2015 be the same? I think not: here’s why.

Fear, in the short term at least, appears to be diminishing. I spoke of a heightened sensitivity to a market fall late last year, indicated by the VVIX, the volatility of volatility index. Following that analysis, observe, in the image above, that VVIX (blue) is significantly lower for comparable peaks of the VIX (orange). I think the increased sensitivity seen in December has diminished in the short term.

Do we see a similar pattern for VVIX in the same plot? Look at the early March 2014 to early April 2014 time frame. Coming after a duration of increasing VIX and VVIX, diminished peaks of VIX and VVIX in early April (as compared with early March) were followed by a period of consolidation, or settling down, of both these market psychology indicators. Granted other conditions may not have been quite the same – economic indicators and global events, the plunge in commodities such as oil and natural gas in particular – but the prior period was an earnings cycle start as is the present time period. There is, surely, reasonable correlation.

Besides, with input costs (energy: oil, natural gas) significantly lower, many companies, and industries in general, are expected to do very well this quarter. Alcoa (AA), that traditionally kicks off the earnings season, may, despite softness in aluminum (its end product) pricing, beat its earnings expectations. The stock has seen a strong run up in the last few sessions in the run to its announcement on Monday. AA was up 1.32% in a significantly down market on Friday (1/9/15). The week is also filled with other key earnings announcements as Jim Cramer detailed in his recent Mad Money session.

Jim Cramer: CNBC Mad Money session on earnings week of 01/12/15

Sure, the market appeared to take a tumble on Friday, and also at the beginning of the year. It fell by more than 1% on the DOW and 0.84% on the SP500 to ~2045. But it is important to take measure of where we’ve come from: the SP500 fell to ~1996 in the middle of the week, and rose to ~2060 before pulling back on Friday. A swing of more than 3% up before giving back a bit – something considered healthy after such a rapid move up.

All told, subject to the usual disclaimer that past history is no guarantee of future behavior in the market, I think we’ll see an earnings-driven week ahead, and likely one that sees the market moving higher. In the short term, therefore, volatility may settle lower.

Full Disclosure: I hold a small short VIX position for the coming week.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Social engineering by the State

An excerpt from “Humbling and Humility“

I characterized the state’s actions as vigilante in nature, of how they’d called in, came in unsolicited into my home, and how they deemed me, on the spot, to be the criminal to be prosecuted. It was fair to say that Manuel’s story stoked my own smoldering fire against presumed guilt, and injustice, by the state.

Sid attempted to explain the state’s behavior. “There is zero tolerance; the state throws ninety seven people under the bus to get two or three really bad ones.” He spoke about the perception of violence, about how almost any action even including one’s very presence could be perceived to be intimidating, and interpreted by the state as [domestic violence]. As the group listened with some disbelief, Sid tried to backpedal, indicating that the state does this so the ninety seven thrown under the bus can see how bad it can get. We get it, Sid, thank you. The state’s the bus, and you, a modern Arnaud Amalric. We are the ninety seven crushed under it, the doomed Cathars of Béziers.

The group voiced that the label sucks, and that the damage can be permanent to one so labeled. The actions by the state, I continued, could compel me to leave Wariduna and the country to be able to find gainful employment. Or impoverish me and compel me to explore new, alternate occupations. Though I did not reveal this in the group, thoughts of a life of white-collar crime had also crept into my mind.

Sid strove to justify the state’s approach. “It used to be different in the past, but the pendulum has now swung the other way.” He said that certain high-profile cases, that my lawyer Mindy also alluded to, the O. J. Simpson case in particular, had prompted a number of states to act. The states provided new guidelines, to their law enforcement cadre, to err on the side of caution. This produced large numbers of undeserving instances of prosecution of men under the DV umbrella.

A pendulum? Is that what the justice––no––legal system is, here? Something that swings to an extreme, and then back the other way, passing for a fleeting moment through the middle? It may have been just an illustrative model Sid employed, but his pendulum sure had swung hard against me, knocking any expectations of fairness and equal treatment out. This pendulum was not only an unstable system, it was, in the hands of a ruthless and single-minded collection of authorities, a hammer of social injustice and repression.

That reminded me of our many unilateral actions, arrogantly undertaken, including invasions. Action that resulted in unimaginable suffering for innocents, as in recent wars waged to liberate countries, to teach their ancient people how to govern themselves with our laws and law enforcement. And of rough statements––“Boot on BP’s throat”––from none other than the head of the country’s administration, bringing to mind an image of violence far removed from the diplomacy hoped for. I recall emailing Lauren about this––after my matter had concluded––with not a word back in response from her.

What was most troubling was the same righteousness, with which our ways, of convenience and rampant materialism, invaded other ways of life readily, overcoming and decimating them. Is this integration and inclusion, wise and considerate cultural assimilation, or is this an extreme approach that could give rise to and foster fundamentalism?

• • •

Musings on the energy-mass-speedoflight equation, and its circular definition

I have always been fascinated by the famous equation, E=mc2, relating energy, mass, and the speed of light, that Albert Einstein gifted from his insight. Some of his peers criticized it as a circular derivation when he published it in September 1905. I wanted to see if I could arrive at the famous equation, employing other known equations, and demonstrate its circular nature…

To suit those among you interested in typical derivations, a YouTube clip of one such is attached. In this method, the narrator depends upon one of the implications of Einstein’s special theory of relativity, that defines a rest mass and an effective mass that increases as it speeds up. This idea – of mass increasing without limit as velocity increases to approach that of the speed of light – is controversial; I’ve seen a published academic paper that disputes it. Nevertheless, the simple mass-energy relationship, shown to be accurate in nuclear fission experiments, can indeed be derived by this method.

Now for a circular derivation! Energy E=hv=pc, where the first part defines Max Planck’s constant h, where Planck defines energy as proportional to the frequency v (greek nu) of the electromagnetic radiation. The second part of the relation, E=pc, derives from the De Broglie wavelength defined as λ=h/p, where p is the linear momentum (of a photon or “quantum” of electromagnetic radiation, but it is said to be applicable to other particulate matter as well) and c the velocity (of light, or electromagnetic radiation, which is λv or how many wavelengths are traversed per second). If we now define a “mass-equivalent” to this linear momentum p, as p=mv, where v is velocity (or just speed), and circle back to the idea of a photon, which has speed c, we get E=pc=(mc)c = mc2 – all from definitions!

Now for something even more imaginative; hey, was it not Einstein who averred that it was his imagination that led to his theories that changed physics in the twentieth century? Kinetic energy is defined by KE=(1/2)mv2, where v is speed. Knowing the wave-particle duality of components of particles, sub-atomic elements, can we not argue that any mass is simply condensed light of varied energy content? The energy of atoms, comprised of sub-atomic elements that move about as waves of electromagnetic energy, is therefore the kinetic energy of these elements countered by a corresponding amount of other forms of energy that maintain the physical integrity of these atoms. Viewed as condensed light, therefore, the energy content is, at a maximum when released, twice the kinetic energy of elements moving at the speed of light, or E=2(1/2)mv2=mc2, where c is the speed of light.

These are rather specious derivations, and may not hold water with any physicist, but the same energy-mass equation can be derived from a so-called “Gedanken” or thought experiment with a box issuing photons inside it at one end, recoiling from the linear momentum imparted to the photons, and then coming to a stop as these photons strike the other end of the box. Much the same as a cannon inside a rail car at one end, shooting a cannon ball that strikes and stops at the other end of the rail car. These simple derivations (and more refined versions of it) also arrive at the same energy-mass relation, no “Theory of Relativity” required.

That is not to say Einstein’s theory was in any way wrong: many aspects and extensions of it have been conclusively shown to be valid, including time dilation, a most counter-intuitive phenomenon, but widely applied in our GPS (global positioning) satellites today. With many ways to arrive at the energy-mass relation, it has nevertheless also been shown by researchers much later that the relationship isn’t necessarily “absolute” – it does not accurately determine what transpires in all cases, or so I read. Einstein himself marked in his paper that higher order terms were ignored in his original derivation of a slightly different form: change in mass is given by energy radiated divided by the square of the velocity of the radiated energy. Stephen Hawking recently published something to the effect that Relativity and Quantum Mechanics do not work well together when studying event horizon boundaries around black holes, or regions of inescapable gravity, in space.

Hence, to me, the equation is an excellent working model… nothing sacred or earth shattering, just a better understanding of the convertibility of mass and energy. But knowing that mass, energy, and light are all closely related continues to fascinate me…

SP500 Technicals into the New Year

S&P500 Index Chart, Second Half of 2014, with RSI (Source CNBC web page)

Following up on a post on spotting market patterns repeating, I’ve plotted the S&P500 along with a Relative Strength Indicator (RSI) sub-plot above.

Note the short trend lines overlaid on the index and RSI plots in gray and red respectively. From basic technical analysis, here’s how I read this: as the S&P500 index continued on to new highs (the three bounces in the index plot that the rising gray trend line touches), its relative strength declined as seen in corresponding lower highs in the RSI sub-plot. This inverse relationship is called a divergence in market terminology as experienced investors and traders will know.

A somewhat similar situation can also be seen occurring from late August ’14 through mid September; as the index rose, its strength (conviction in the move upward) remained flat and declined toward the end of this period. What followed in the earlier period was uncertainty, volatility, a downward trend, and a plunge beyond early October.

There is a saying in financial markets, that history does not necessarily repeat (‘past performance is no guarantee of future results‘), and there is therefore no guarantee that the New Year will bring about market uncertainty seen in fall ’14. Besides, other indicators such as accumulation/distribution analysis are inconclusive. Nevertheless, the vaunted Santa Rally has been missing in action at the end of 2014, and volatility has indeed picked up the past few days.

Full Disclosure: I continue to stay long volatility (VIX).

Free Will, Domain, and a Continuum of Consciousness

PERSPECTIVE.JPEG (Source: The World Wide Web, Author Unknown)

Termed variously as “Causeless volition,” and “Moral liberty,” the question of free will is somewhat rigorously posed as: “Given all conditions requisite to eliciting an act, except the act itself, does the act necessarily follow?” Some, classified as “Determinists” or fatalists, and necessarians, answer in the affirmative. Others deny this, and assert that one’s volition is not an inevitable result of one’s nature, state of being, and forceful motives acting upon oneself; one does exercise one’s free will.

That this question has far-reaching implications is obvious: if one lacks the capacity to exercise any free will, how can one be responsible for any act, and be held accountable? Is everything consigned thus to fate, or destiny, with individual selves no different from puppets or mechanical bodies moving along according to simple physical laws? But if not, is this an indication of metaphysics at play? Is there more to life, and consciousness, in the manifestation of free will, that affirms agency (intention and action directed to an end) beyond the physical? It is easy to see why this question has occupied minds across the ages.

While the question is clearly psychological (to do with the ‘psyche’), and philosophical, many have attempted to apply scientific principles to illuminate the subject matter. Some have claimed that just as motion of particles is derived from knowledge of their prior states and of forces acting upon them (Newtonian mechanics), prior conditions and present motivations move individuals inevitably on their respective pathways. Others counter such a position with more recent discoveries of relativity, quantum mechanics, and quantum uncertainty (shown to be the same as the wave-particle apparent duality of sub-atomic components recently) specifically, claiming that these twentieth century findings bring unpredictability into observable outcomes, and thus open the door for whatever other explanation one may wish to slip in.

Yet, while scientific principles are eminently useful in comprehending phenomena in their particular domains, I argue that it is too far a stretch to employ such principles, applicable to sub-atomic particles or inanimate matter, to comprehend decision-making, at the high levels of abstraction, in biological neural networks. Quantum uncertainty in the sub-atomic domain does not map, in any conceivable manner, to decision unpredictability in the human mind, despite the discovery of microtubules in the construction of neurons and quantum effects in such structures. No, the wave-particle duality of sub-atomic components does not affirm any mind-brain duality (or any soul-mind-body trinity) in the biology of living beings. That can only be wishful, fanciful, romantic thinking, putting it euphemistically!

Others, measuring neural activity patterns, have labored to demonstrate that neural activity leading to decisions occurs anywhere from a half-second (the Benjamin Libet experiments in 1980) to four seconds (John-Dylan Haynes’s experiments in 2013) before the manifested act. And in doing so, they’ve argued that since neural activity patterns originated before a “conscious registration” of the decision (about a quarter second before flicking the wrist in the Libet experiments), the conscious mind wasn’t really involved in the inevitable decision! In the most recent such experiment, neural patterns detected some seconds before a decision were seen to predict a binary decision with around 60% accuracy, or a little better than a coin toss.

A recent Scientific American article, by Eddy Nahmias of Georgia State University, argues against such assertions by polling for conviction in free will despite advancement in technology permitting deeper inspection and measurement of neural signalling in the brain. But scientific inquiry isn’t really about what a majority believe, is it? If that were the case, we may yet find ourselves moving about on a flat earth with the sun, the moon, and the stars revolving around us at unimaginably great velocity.

No, such inquiry is subject to many assumptions and limitations…a fundamental assumption being the very subjective definition of consciousness. I think of consciousness as a far more complex phenomenon, manifested by the processes of life, than the subjective registration, in a mental construct of an “I,” of an awareness. Viewed in this holistic continuum, of all processes of life as consciousness, there is no distinction between listening to an experimenter’s requests and carrying out the experiment as described in the consciousness of the experiment participant; any ‘branch’ decision made in this overall process is simply part of the activity.

In these binary experiments, the participant knows that only one of two choices can be made; there are no other choices possible. The fact that conscious registration of a direction taken occurs a short while after initiation of the choice does not prove that the participant was involuntarily acting based upon neural signals in the unconscious or beyond the participant’s domain. It may only indicate that a mental construct or process within – the “I” – may need that much additional time to register such a choice made.

It is these definitions – the “conscious mind,” the “sub-conscious mind,” and the “unconscious mind” (can we blame Sigmund Freud for them?) – that cloud any inferences that may be drawn in such experiments. Does the unconscious and the subconscious not belong to a participant’s consciousness? Are they distinct from the participant’s mind?

Such experiments do help shed light on the complexity of the brain, its processes, and our own recognition of what goes on within. They have little if anything to say about free will, or the ability to make reasoned, illogical, imaginative, or whimsical choices.

What we do know about ourselves, our brains, to put it simply, is that we have instinctual, emotional, imaginative thought, as well as competitive, cooperative, and contemplative capabilities, developed to varying extents through nature and nurture, that afford us a wide range of thought and resolution. Such complexity in any system permits non-linear and chaotic functionality, to put it in scientific terminology, that can depart very significantly from linear, cause-effect determination.

In other words, it is quite conceivable that we have the capacity for free will…to think and act contrary to predictions, contrary to our self-interest, contrary to rational thought and action that is in our domain. Altruism in adulthood, inherent and observable in many living beings (not just humans), is perhaps a manifestation of such ability.

Perspective (the image): If you’ve wondered about the significance of the picture included in this post… We, on Earth, consider ourselves unique, distinct. Yet we are but an insignificant part of an immense and complex Universe. The mental construct, the “I” similarly, is but a tiny part of our complex consciousness…