Now, if we agree that she did a bad thing, if nobody recommends people play jokes like this, what are we to say about the neuroscientists who are telling the public every day, "We've shown in our neuroscience labs that nobody has free will."
现在，如果我们一致认为她做了一件坏事，如果没有人想让人们开这样的玩笑，那么我们该如何看待那些每天都在告诉公众 "我们在神经科学实验室里证明了人们没有自由意志 "的神经科学家们？"
I think if the neuroscientists recognize that what my imaginary neurosurgeon did was irresponsible, they should think seriously about whether it's irresponsible of them to make these claims about free will.
And it's not just a fantasy.
Vohs and Schooler, in an important paper, which has been replicated in several different ways, set up an experiment, really to test this with college students, who were given two texts to read.
One was a text. They were both from Francis Crick's book, "The Astonishing Hypothesis," and one was not about free will.
And the other was about free will.
And basically it said, "Free will is an illusion.
All your decisions are actually determined by causes that neuroscience is investigating.
You don't have free will. That's just an illusion."
All right, so there we have two groups.
The group that read that passage and the group that read another passage from that book of the same length.
After they've read the passage, they are given a puzzle to solve where they can earn some money by solving it.
And the experimenters cleverly made the puzzles slightly defective, so there was a way of cheating on the puzzle.
That was, oops, inadvertently revealed to the subjects.
And guess what?
The subjects who'd read the passage where Crick says, "Free will is an illusion," cheated at a much higher rate than the other ones.
那些读过克里克说 "自由意志是一种幻觉 "这段话的受试者作弊的比例比其他受试者高得多
In other words, just reading that passage did have the effect of making them less concerned about the implications of their actions and they became, as it were, negligent, or worse, in their own decision-making.