Whether people’s actions are influenced by an outside force over which they have no control or whether they are free to choose how they behave is at the heart of the debate between free will and determinism. George Saunders’ science fiction novella “Escape from Spider Head” explores the philosophical conflict between determinism and free agency. The narrative centers on a man in a drug-induced coma seeking an explanation for his decisions and life. The main character wrestles with the thought that his existence and choices are predestined and that he has no influence over his destiny. This philosophical argument is explored darkly and provocatively in the novel. It provides a profound understanding of the human psyche and the influence of decisions. Saunders challenges readers to consider whether they believe in free will vs. determinism through the narrative. He also urges people to consider the results of their choices and how they affect their life. Altogether, this tale examines an old philosophical controversy and will cause readers to ponder their values and decisions, making it significant in this essay. In this essay, we explain Jeff’s role in Abnesti’s project at Spider head and how it affects one preferred position on free will, among others, as discussed below.
Why does Jeff participate in Abnesti’s project at Spiderhead? Has he chosen to participate?
In the narrative, Jeff takes part in a Spiderhead experiment under the direction of Dr. Abnesti (Julian et al., p. 14). He is given medicines that change his feelings to examine the consequences of influencing people’s emotions. When offered the option to participate or not, Jeff decides to do so. Whether a person can decide for themselves or if external forces predetermine all of them is the central question concerning free will and determinism. Given that he’s exposed to drugs and Abnesti’s experiments in this novel, Jeff’s ability to exercise free choice is constrained (Galef, p. 145-146). Even if he is offered an opportunity to participate, the fact that he finds himself in this circumstance initially suggests that his decision is currently set (Julian et al., p. 8-16). Determinism is implied by Jeff’s involvement in Abnesti’s initiative and his willingness to do so. Jeff is still motivated to stay in the project by his objectives and motivations, even though he can opt-out. Although the substances and the surroundings impact his judgments, he is ultimately in control of his actions. This implies that people can still exercise free will when their freedoms are restricted.
What was Jeff’s fateful night? In what sense was it “fateful”?
Also, Jeff had a fateful night when a doctor at the facility named Brink told Jeff that he would be testing a new medication called Remorseless start this fateful night. Brink says that the medication will prevent Jeff from feeling regret or guilt. Jeff hesitantly takes the medication, and the symptoms come quickly (Athitakis, para. 1-3). Jeff’s fateful night began after he was arrested and booked into the Spider head Institute. This clinic specializes in changing human behavior via medications and other therapies. Jeff had no idea he would be the focus of an experiment to explore the boundaries of free choice vs. determinism. Jeff’s night was momentous in that it represented a watershed moment in his and the other subjects’ lives; their encounters at the Institute would change the direction of their lives and give an understanding of the concept of free choice vs. determinism. How much control Jeff had over his life would be determined by his decisions, deeds, and responses to the therapies he received (Athitakis, para. 1-3). The boundaries of free will and Jeff’s ability to make decisions for himself were therefore tested during his fatal night at the Spiderhead Institute.
How does Jeff “doink with [Abnesti’s) experimental design integrity”?
By figuring out a means to get away from Spiderhead, Jeff “doinks with” the integrity of the experimental design used by Abnesti (Julian et al., p. 6-14). He does this by not following the experiment’s determinism and instead using his free will to maneuver the circumstance to his advantage. Jeff can choose between two medications. The first substance would make him feel loved as he carries out a fellow prisoner’s death sentence. He won’t feel anything after taking the second dose.
Jeff utilizes his free will to outwit Abnesti by employing the second pill to numb himself to the circumstance rather than selecting either drug (Willa, para. 1). The effects of the second medication are then neutralized by the injection of the first drug in his arm, enabling him to experience the love he intended to feel for the condemned prisoner (Julian et al., p. 6-14). Because he is acting according to his moral convictions rather than the experiment’s rules, Jeff can keep his integrity and sense of autonomy. While eventually leading to the experiment’s failure, Jeff’s exercise of free will demonstrates that he is capable of choosing his path and grasping his morals, which is impossible in the case of determinism.
Does Jeff choose his fate at the end of the story? Is it entirely up to him?
Jeff is a prisoner in a technologically advanced facility where scientists use medications to control his emotions and actions. Throughout the narrative, Jeff questions whether his decisions are his own or whether the drugs and the scientists’ deceptions have already chosen what he will do (Julian et al., para. 1-3). After the narrative, Jeff must decide between two drugs: one that will make him feel deep love and empathy for Heather, the lady he has been seeing, or one that will make him feel great anger and aggressiveness toward her (Saunders, para. 1-30). In the end, Jeff decides to use the love drug and confess his emotions for Heather, which has a disastrous result.
Overarching Question:
How does the story reinforce my preferred position on free will?
My preferred view of free will stipulates that we have had some degree of influence on our existence but that both our internal and external environments limit this power. This idea is supported by Saunders’ narrative, which exemplifies how Spider Head’s experimental atmosphere and its joy-inducing medications may restrict the participants’ freedom of choice. By influencing the participants’ emotions and wants, the researchers can exert behavioral control over them while robbing individuals of their independence and freedom of choice.
How can the story challenge your preferred position on free will? Explain
The narrative also repudiates my favored view of free will in this regard. Jeff, the main character, finally succeeds in escaping Spider Head and regaining his independence. This shows that despite the solid outside influences that impact our lives, we still have control over our decisions and destiny. Jeff’s escape challenges the assumption that our surroundings fully control us, supporting the view that we have power over our lives and can make our own decisions. Ultimately, Saunders’ “Escape from Spider Head” is a compelling novel that challenges and confirms my beliefs on free will, pushing me to consider the intricacy of the problem. It implies that our environment and internal constraints may constrain our free will, but we may still utilize our decisions to influence our fates. Although Jeff seems to decide on the narrative’s conclusion, it is unclear whether he did so out of his free will. His choice could have been impacted by the drugs and deceptions he encountered throughout the narrative, indicating that his actions may have been somewhat predestined.
In summary, George Saunders’s “Escape from Spiderhead” paper explores the debate between understanding free choice and determinism. Even though free will is constrained, people still can decide for themselves; Jeff’s involvement in Abnesti’s initiative and desire to do so attest to the notion of determinism. Also, it is up for debate if Jeff decides his fate at the end of “Escape from Spiderhead.” While Jeff seemed to make a choice based on his feelings, other variables likely had a role in his decision, leaving the question of free will vs. determinism open. Saunders shows how our choices shape our fate even when the circumstances seem preordained by giving two characters similar planned events but different results. The novel finally exudes a sense of optimism because it shows that choice and liberty are available regardless of challenging situations, despite the grim and repressive backdrop of the jail.
Work Cited
Athitakis, Mark. “Good, Evil, and ‘Escape from Spiderhead.’” Markathitakis.com, 15 Dec. 2010, https://markathitakis.com/2010/12/15/good-evil-and-escape-from-spiderhead/
B, Julian, et al. “September 14, 2020.” Story Power, 14 Sept. 2020, https://storypower.criticsandbuilders.com/2020/09/14/#:~:text=This%20crime%20is%20referred%20to,a%20guy%20in%20a%20fight.
Galef, David. “Fiction in review: George Saunders.” The Yale review 102.3 (2014): 141-151.
S, Willa. “Abnesti’s Profanity.” Story Power, 14 Sept. 2020, https://storypower.criticsandbuilders.com/2020/09/14/abnestis-profanity/.
Saunders, George. “Escape from Spiderhead.” The New Yorker, 13 Dec. 2010, www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/12/20/escape-from-spiderhead.
write