Denial of Free Will Reduces Resentment and Guilt, While Preserving Responsibility
A study from the University of Melbourne examines how rejecting the notion of free will impacts moral emotions. The findings suggest reduced resentment and shame, increased forgiveness, and maintained responsibility, challenging the traditional view that denying free will is dangerous.
According to an article by Aaron Walton, a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Psychology at the University of Melbourne, published in The Conversation, a new study investigating the effects of rejecting the concept of free will on human moral emotions has garnered significant attention.
Neuroscientist Robert Sapolsky, in his 2023 bestseller Determined, argued that the interaction between biology and environment leaves no room for free choice. Philosopher and neuroscientist Sam Harris has been even more forthright, asserting that “free will is an illusion.”
However, prominent figures in psychology and the media have long warned that telling the public free will is an illusion is risky. This concern is rooted in a series of psychological studies suggesting that undermining belief in free will could lead to increased dishonesty, aggression, and reduced prosocial behavior.
New Insights from Recent Research
Recent research by Walton and colleagues challenges this prevailing view, suggesting it is incomplete and potentially misleading. A series of experiments, including a new study published in the British Journal of Social Psychology, has revealed that accepting the illusion of free will can reduce feelings of resentment and shame while fostering forgiveness.
Free will is commonly defined as the idea that people can make choices free from preexisting conditions such as genetics, upbringing, and situational factors. Randomness, however, does not equate to free will; random acts are a matter of chance rather than an expression of free choice.
In his 2023 bestseller, Determined, neuroscientist Robert Sapolsky argued that the interaction of biology and environment leaves no room for free choice. Philosopher and neuroscientist Sam Harris puts the case more bluntly: “free will is an illusion”. However, prominent voices in psychology and the media have warned that telling people free will is an illusion is dangerous. The concern draws on a body of psychological research suggesting that when people’s belief in free will is undermined, the consequences can be troubling: more cheating, more aggression, less helpfulness. But my recent research, including a new study published in the British Journal of Social Psychology, suggests this picture is incomplete and misleading. In fact, it shows that accepting free will is an illusion can reduce hatred and shame, and increase forgiveness.
Forgiveness of Self and Others
In the first experiment, 260 participants were asked to write about an experience where they had hurt someone else, prompting them to recall feelings of shame and self-blame. Those who read materials asserting that free will does not exist exhibited significantly greater levels of self-forgiveness compared to participants who read materials affirming the existence of free will.
In the second experiment, 262 participants wrote about experiences where they had been hurt by others. Participants exposed to the idea that free will does not exist showed greater forgiveness toward those who had wronged them and significantly less resentment.
Responsibility Remains Intact
A critical finding from both experiments was that participants’ sense of accountability was not diminished. Participants continued to agree that they (or the wrongdoers) were responsible for their actions, that their actions were their own fault, and that people should strive to avoid causing harm to others.
Rather than diminishing responsibility, the denial of free will appeared to reduce the emotional intensity associated with blame.
Results from a Large-Scale International Survey
These experimental results are further supported by a new large-scale international study. This research, conducted over several months with 8,917 participants from 44 countries, measured the degree of belief in free will (using validated scales) and punitive attitudes toward everyday moral violations.
Participants read a series of scenarios describing minor moral transgressions, such as lying or selfish behavior, and rated on a scale from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very much) how deserving of punishment the wrongdoer was. The study found a correlation: the stronger the belief in free will, the harsher the punitive responses to everyday moral violations.
Editorial Opinion
Short-Term Implications
These findings invite a reevaluation of the traditional, oversimplified narrative surrounding the societal impact of denying free will. Psychology research has long upheld the idea that “denying free will leads to social disorder.” However, this study provides a fresh perspective by separating emotional responses from the concept of responsibility.
In the current era, where artificial intelligence and automation increasingly replace human decision-making, redefining the notion of responsibility becomes a significant issue with practical implications. Over the next three to six months, this research may influence discussions not only in psychology but also in the development of AI ethics guidelines and legal frameworks.
Long-Term Perspectives
The discovery that denying free will can alleviate emotional burdens holds promise for applications in criminal justice systems and conflict resolution within organizations. Over the next one to three years, new frameworks may emerge to separate the emotional components of blame from societal responsibilities.
In the technology sector, this could inform the legal and ethical frameworks governing autonomous AI systems. It may challenge traditional design philosophies predicated on “human responsibility” and introduce greater complexity to debates surrounding accountability and transparency in AI systems.
References
- “Accepting free will doesn’t exist could make us less hateful and ashamed”, by Aaron Walton, PhD candidate, Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne — The Conversation - Technology, 2026-07-26T20:06:19.000Z (CC BY-ND)
- Source URL: https://theconversation.com/accepting-free-will-doesnt-exist-could-make-us-less-hateful-and-ashamed-282155
Frequently Asked Questions
- Does accepting that free will does not exist lead people to act irresponsibly?
- According to the research findings, denying free will does not reduce a sense of responsibility. Participants continued to acknowledge personal responsibility for actions, fault, and the need for efforts to avoid causing harm. What changed was the emotional intensity of blame—resentment and shame were reduced while accountability remained intact.
- How do these findings relate to AI ethics?
- As AI systems expand their role in autonomous decision-making, the need to redefine the concept of responsibility becomes increasingly urgent. A framework that does not rely on the assumption of free will offers valuable insights into addressing questions of accountability for AI actions and delineating the responsibilities of developers. The distinction between emotional responses and responsibility may influence the design and regulatory frameworks for AI-equipped products.
- Will weaker beliefs in free will disrupt social order?
- While earlier studies raised concerns about increased dishonesty and aggression, this new research suggests the opposite—greater feelings of forgiveness and reduced hostility. The societal impact of denying free will may vary by context and individual differences. If emotional responses and accountability can be separated, it may be possible to maintain the necessary concepts of responsibility for social order while mitigating excessive blame and retaliatory emotions.
Comments