Is Free Will Possible for Bacteria?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hivesaeed4
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bacteria Free will
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on whether bacteria possess free will, with the consensus leaning towards no, as their actions are driven by simple stimuli rather than conscious decision-making. The lack of consciousness in bacteria suggests that while they can act as agents, they do not have true will. The conversation also touches on the philosophical complexities surrounding the concept of free will, questioning its meaning and relevance. Additionally, the relationship between humans and bacteria is highlighted, noting that humans are composed of a significant percentage of bacterial cells, which raises further questions about decision-making and agency. Ultimately, the debate on free will remains intricate and unresolved, inviting further exploration in both philosophy and science.
hivesaeed4
Messages
217
Reaction score
0
I was discussing the concept of free will with my professor and he asked me to ponder over the question of whether bacteria has free will. I answered no as everything it does has a simple reason like it will move towards food whereas it will move away from an unpleasant area and so on. It doesn't (as far as I know) dispay emotions or curiosty etc, like us.

Any discussion/views on the topic would be welcomed.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Whilst we don't have a solution to the hard problem of consciousness (in otherwords we cannot explain exactly how consciousness arises and what it is) all of what we do know points to bacteria not being conscious beings. As such they can be agents (i.e. capable of action) but without consciousness there can't really be will.

Having said all that your professor was probably just trying to get you to think of free will in general and uses the example of a bacteria as a good frame for this. The reason being that the difference between us and bacteria is relatively small; we too are a culmination of chemical reactions but there is both a qualitative and quantitative difference between us (though examples of elephants and redwoods would point to the latter not being significant).

Lastly "free will" is a long and complex debate in itself as to whether or not the term even makes sense and what it could mean. See the philosophy forum for more on that.
 
I read this interesting article a while back, which suggests bacteria under stress have to make decisions, and their decisions are dependent on what other bacteria decide:

http://murj.mit.edu/news/world/16
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OP: do humans have free will?

atyy said:

I think that use of the term "free will" in the first link is kind of irrelevant to the actual paradoxical idea of free will. You could just replace "free will" with "local noise" and it would be functionally identical, only the words "free will" brings a bunch of philosophical baggage with it, whereas "local noise" remains neutral about the noise source.
 
Bacteria may not have free will, but they are collectively very successful. Who needs free will?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top