...David Chen Instructor Lyle Crawford Philosophy 100 Words: 1404 4th April 2013 A Brief Introduction of Libertarianism and Its Dilemma Do all of our actions have a cause, and are we merely a functioning object following determinism? Or do we control our own behaviours, so we have free will? This long time argument has been extended into two opponent theories: Libertarianism and Hard Determinism. Both of these theories, who are fans of incompatibilism, indicate determinism and free will cannot exist at the same time. One the contrary, the compatibilist theory, Soft Determinism, asserts that determinism and free will can be consistent. As believers and defenders of free will, even though libertarians seem to have strong appeals with our common sense, many of them have a problem defining what freedom is. Some libertarians try to come up with a major argument, agent causation, to reject Determinism. But the argument faces its own dilemma. Since Libertarianism has many problems which do not seem to have any solution, I prefer to choose the position of Hard Determinism in this paper. The first appeal of Libertarianism, which aims to convince people to believe in free will, claims that people are so particular that they are detached from other things. No laws can control people’s behaviours, and therefore “they are free”. Regardless humans have souls or not, we are still the controller of our own behaviours (Conee and Sider, 2005, p.119)....
Words: 1414 - Pages: 6
...ARGUMENTS AGAINST DETERMINISM: MAN IS FREE, NO MORE, NO LESS INTRODUCTION The issues of Freedom and Determinism have been sensitive issues that have sparked off heated debates throughout history. The question whether man is really free has been a hard nut to crack and as a result of this, many attempts have been made by different individuals from both philosophical and theological point of view in their effort to explain and understand this concept ‘Freedom’. The line of thought that supports the notion of free will is also called libertarianism. DEFINITION OF CONCEPTS Before delving into the argument, it is worthy of note that the terms under discussion be given a definition for a better understanding of the terms. According to Advanced Learners’ Dictionary, determinism is the belief that people are not free to choose what they are like or how they behave because these things are decided by their background, surroundings and other things over which they have no control. It is simply the view that man is not free, that his actions are determined by certain causes. On another note, libertarianism according to the same source is the belief that people should have the freedom to do and think as they like. Freedom is simply man’s capacity to take hand in his own development. Concentrating more on the major object of my argument which is against determinism, the concept freedom was supported by both philosophers and theologians throughout history. On the part of the philosophers...
Words: 1742 - Pages: 7
...Argument and logic Free will versus determinism is the excerpt I chose for this argument and logic assignment .Free will and determinism have opposite meanings so the belief of free will and also atoms doing what they do being predetermined cannot be true .unless the given circumstance makes it true .Let me explain free will is defined as the power given to human beings to make their own choices that is unconstrained by external circumstances or by fate or divine will .Determinism is defined as that every event or act and decision is an inescapable consequence of antecedents that are independent of free will .Which states that humans do not have free will to chose. This is not caused because anything or anybody is trying to control humans it just is. This belief is true in religion and cause and effect .Many religious people believe that the existence of god supports determinism .Because that god is all knowing and all powerful so there is nothing that god does not know or that he does not already know .If people had free will there would be things that people would do that god does not already know about and that would limit god being all powerful .The other argument about determinism is cause and effect this argument says the same thing would always occur due to the event .Let’s say you throw a rubber ball on the ground it would hit the ground and bounce back up .Throwing the ball against the floor was the cause and the effect was the ball bouncing .Based on this everything...
Words: 379 - Pages: 2
... MEANING Paper 1 – Final Version Prompt 2: A crucial thought behind Van Inwagen’s Consequence Argument is that we lack the ability either to change the past or change the laws. If determinism is true, he argues, our present actions are a direct combination of the past and the laws. And on that basis, he concludes that if determinism is true then what we in fact do is all that we can do. David Lewis rejects this reasoning. He claims that while there is sense in which we cannot break the laws of nature, there is also a sense in which we can break the laws of nature. Moreover, he claims that once we appreciate this distinction, Van Inwagen’s argument for the incompatibility of freedom and determinism collapses. Who has the better of this dispute? Write a paper which answers that question....
Words: 1543 - Pages: 7
...Can compatibilism be defended? Introduction This essay argues in favor of a compatibilist, that free will and determinism can co-exist. Consequently it will support the concept of compatibilism and determine that it can be defended. Two basic ideas will be outlined in this argument in support of this claim. Firstly, the notion of compatibilism, that actions can be both free and causally determined (Shabo, 2012; Sober, 2009). Secondly, it will be deliberated what it means to act freely. Followed by a reply, these counter arguments will also be discussed; Incompatibilists disagree with these ideas and believe that determinism is true and that no person has free will, this is called hard determinism. In addition, a libertarian’s point of view; that we are free and our actions are not causally determined (Sober, 2009). Furthermore, the trouble with determining what freewill is. Argument 1 Compatibilism is the idea that determinism is true; every event in the world has a cause, however, freewill can still exist. The aim of a compatibilist is to show that an act can be done freely if it has been caused a certain way (Sober, 2009). This leaves room for the idea that freedom doesn’t require the absence of causality, but rather, the right kind of causality (Millican, 2010; Sober, 2009). This makes reasonable sense because it is common knowledge that the way an individual acts and thinks has been determined by their genes and past experiences. Who the person is has been affected...
Words: 1458 - Pages: 6
...Free Will vs. Determinism ` One of the most reoccurring theoretical arguments of philosophy is the problem of free will and determinism. Walter Stace describes the famous debate between free will and determinism as one that does not have a simple solution because each side has substantial evidence that supports its ideas and beliefs. Although, Walter provides information on both approaches to free will, he was known to defend a view on the issue of free will and determinism called compatibilism. Compatibilism allows us to have a significant idea of what free will is as well as acknowledge that we do not decide to make spontaneous decisions but rather our choices are an outcome of previous causes. Basically, Stace claims that our natural choices are made at our own liberty and that we are in control of the most abrupt periods of a long causal chain. The concept of free will, well matched with determinism is crucial if we are to comprehend how anyone can be morally responsible for his or her actions. Stace's argument is mainly focused on the basic nature of morality and its significance to the problem of free will. Walter Stace claimed it is almost certain that if there is no free will there can be no morality. If morality is perceived to be of a fabricated nature, the question of what is primarily accurate and incorrect can now be challenged, as generally everything has already been predetermined. He then disputes that philosophers who oppose the reality of free will only...
Words: 1093 - Pages: 5
...In Clifford Williams’ Free Will and Determinism: A Dialogue, free will, determinism, and compatibilism are compared. Free will states that one has a choice to do anything one wants to do and has al alternatives open to him/her. Determinism states that everything one does is a result of something else that happened in the past. One has the assumption that he/she has more than one choice but in reality only one is really open. Compatibilism states that free will and determinism are compatible. To believe in compatibilism means that one believes that his/her actions are due to chance or happen because the action is chosen. The problem with this premise is that if it were due to chance than one cannot be held responsible for his/her actions because he/she did not choose to do anything. If the action was due to choice than there should be a cause as to why one chose one thing over the other. In other words, an act is only free when an outside force has not caused it, and everything one does is determined. In Peter van Inwagen’s Powers of Rational Beings: Freedom of the Will, he argues that we have free will and it is incompatible with determinism. van Inwagen argues that if determinism were true if the universe were rolled back to a previous state then the history of the world would repeat itself. No matter how many times this was to happen, the outcome would always be the same. Determinism says that out of all the possible choices we think we have only one is actually physically...
Words: 1110 - Pages: 5
...Free Will and Determinism- is it an Illusion? Determinism, libertarianism and compatibilism are three significantly different views on where unaccountability might stop and where free will and moral responsibility begin. Determinism is the strict opinion that every action and decision is the cause of an event, genetics or the environment prior to that action. Quite the opposite is libertarianism, which happens to be the genuine belief in free will as well as the denial of universal causation. Finally, deep self-compatibilism meshes both of these stand points together and introduces the idea that one’s action can be free if it stems purely out of personal, authentic desire. Since all three judgments have a backbone of convincing arguments, it is difficult to live by just one. Studying the Satyr’s justification, Hench’s ever-changing attitude toward his creation, and Michael Gorr’s point if view on the matter, one way of thinking may become more rational than the others. Silenus the Satyr is a strange creature, half man, half goat who was brought to life in a laboratory by a man named Hench. Near the end of this fiction, Silenus is sold to slavery in an environment lacking both booze and women after he acts on a desire to have sex with a woman without her consent. The Satyr repeatedly uses his hard determinist point of view to convince Hench that everything that happens has a reason, and if something is caused it cannot be free. Therefore, the Satyr has neither free will...
Words: 1883 - Pages: 8
...Critically consider arguments for free-will in psychology (30 marks) One argument for free-will comes from the psychological argument, which suggests that people have a subjective sense of free-will and all people are able to make their own free choices about their behaviour. Evidence for this comes from Dr. Johnson in the 18th Century who sustained the idea that ‘we know our will is free, and there’s an end on ‘t’. (A01) However, a counterargument towards the psychological argument is that simply feeling that you are free does not mean that this is true. Skinner claimed that free will was an illusion – we think we are free, but this is because we are not aware of how our behaviour is determined by reinforcement. Freud also thought that free will was an illusion, because he felt that the causes of our behaviour is unconscious and therefore still predictable. (A02 ) In contrast, Valentine (1982) claims that this subjective sense of free will is tenable (reasonable). It is something that can be studied and thus shown to be true, e.g., attitudes towards free will have been found to increase with age and are also more common in individualistic cultures such as the USA and UK where personal responsibility receives greater emphasis. (A02 ) Another argument for free will in psychology derives from the ethical argument. This states that if an individual’s behaviour is determined by forces beyond their control, then the individual cannot be held responsible for their...
Words: 1223 - Pages: 5
...it has seemed increasingly likely that our brains work along deterministic lines (or, if quantum effects are non-negligible, at the very least along mechanical lines). So a new debate has arisen: are the concepts of determinism (or naturalism or mechanism) when applied to the brain sciences logically compatible with free will? So some of the attention has shifted from the debate between the “determinists” and the “anti-determinists”, to that between the “compatibilists” and the “anticompatibilists”. Two declared opponents in this debate are Peter van Inwagen (author of An Essay on Free Will, Oxford University Press, 1983) and Daniel C. Dennett (author of several books including Elbow Room, MIT Press, 1984, which I will be referencing here). Each argues for his conclusion from premises he regards as antecedently plausible, with van Inwagen taking the anti-compatibilist line and Dennett the compatibilist. As van Inwagen is the more precise arguer of the two, I will use his work as the starting point for this discussion. Like Dennett, whose book is subtitled “The Varieties of Free Will Worth Wanting”, he is arguing that we do have free will.Where they differ is on the nature of its relationship to determinism. Van Inwagen presents three premises in his main argument : that free will is in fact incompatible with...
Words: 1908 - Pages: 8
...is the role of dispositions in the account of mental states? They are statements about how a person will behave in various circumstances. If conditions are such-and-such, then the person will behave so-and-so.) Does the behaviorist deny that behavior is caused by the brain processes? Why brain processes do not constitute mental states? There is nothing more to mental states than how we are disposed to act. Behaviorists maintain that mental states are nothing more than dispositions to behave in certain ways! What is the inner aspect of mental states and why does it provide and argument against behaviorism? Why does it provide an argument against behaviorism? Epiphenomenalism is the view that mental events are caused by physical events in the brain, but have no effects upon any physical events. What is the interconnected character of mental states and how does it provide an argument against behaviorism? Every mental state is related to another mental state. It denies everything internally. For example pain, you need an Asprin to feel better. When you define one mental state, you must define another. Behaviorist don’t believe in feelings or beliefs because they only believe in observational proofs. What are mental states according to the identity theory? The identity theory of mind holds that states and processes of the mind are identical to states and processes of the brain. What are the parallels...
Words: 2235 - Pages: 9
...This principle of free will has implications on religion, legal and ethical factors among others. Philosophers since time immemorial have debated extensively on the existence or the nonexistence of free will in nature.one of this philosophical figure is David Hume, he maintains that humans are free because of decisions and their actions. This is so because though determined, they are determined by our individual motives. He demonstrated that determinism is a very integral part to the existence of individual free will. This therefore means that because our actions being determined causally by our motives and character human beings are morally responsible and are free willed. This then becomes a point of objection because if everything is caused, then what we decide is itself caused. Hume argues that human motives and desire is the Couse of their decisions. Determinism argument is not that we are free but that free will exists. The other philosopher who contributed this debate is Thomas Hobbes. He had a slightly different view on determinism and free will from those held by Hume. He said that God is the ultimate origin of every action, but if humans are not physically required to do any action, there is free will. Hobbes developed his thesis in name of liberty vs. necessity, as opposed free will vs. outwardly determined will. The order in which events followed leading to an individual being blown off a cliff by the wind can be said to have caused that event that was the necessary...
Words: 1165 - Pages: 5
...Oct 18 2014 The Contradiction between Determinism and Free Will: To What Extent Are Humans Free? Recently, the issue of free will is much concerned to a point where a wide discussion has been sparked. Free will, on any layer, has been considered as the ability of agents to make choices unimpeded by certain factors. It is obvious that humans have a strong sense of freedom, which leads people to believe that they have free will (Caruso 8). On the other hand, there is a scientific view assumes that physical world can be predicted by physical law including human consciousness, which is also known as determinism. Following those debates there comes a moral dilemma: How are we to assign responsibility for our actions if they are caused totally by external environment and passed events (Baer 128)? The underlying problem is, do humans actually have free will? If so, to what extent are humans able to control themselves? The fundamental controversy of free will and determinism, which represents the question of whether freedom of human mind exists, has been debated by numerous scientists and philosophers. This essay will firstly have a brief review on the arguments and viewpoints of free will and determinism of several philosophers, including Blatchford, Hospers and Taylor. Following this, it will compare those assumptions to each other. Finally, the essay will give the author’s own thoughts and debates on this issue. 1. Blatchford’s Arguments Against Free Will Blatchford claims...
Words: 2092 - Pages: 9
...it has seemed increasingly likely that our brains work along deterministic lines (or, if quantum effects are non-negligible, at the very least along mechanical lines). So a new debate has arisen: are the concepts of determinism (or naturalism or mechanism) when applied to the brain sciences logically compatible with free will? So some of the attention has shifted from the debate between the “determinists” and the “anti-determinists”, to that between the “compatibilists” and the “anticompatibilists”. Two declared opponents in this debate are Peter van Inwagen (author of An Essay on Free Will, Oxford University Press, 1983) and Daniel C. Dennett (author of several books including Elbow Room, MIT Press, 1984, which I will be referencing here). Each argues for his conclusion from premises he regards as antecedently plausible, with van Inwagen taking the anti-compatibilist line and Dennett the compatibilist. As van Inwagen is the more precise arguer of the two, I will use his work as the starting point for this discussion. Like Dennett, whose book is subtitled “The Varieties of Free Will Worth Wanting”, he is arguing that we do have free will.Where they differ is on the nature of its relationship to determinism. Van Inwagen presents three premises in his main argument : that free will is in fact incompatible with...
Words: 2100 - Pages: 9
...Avery Suazo Free Will VS. Determinism Though it can be loosely traced back to modern arguments, which mainly revolve around religion, free will versus determinism has been a staple of debate for over a millennia. The side of free will argues that there is nothing inhibiting us, as humans, from making the choices we choose to make. I think that determinism, the other side of the argument, is incredibly vague and ambiguous; while free will is much more viable in every way. First, I will articulate the definitions and intricacies of both ideas; then, I will elaborate as to why free will is the winning choice in this debate; and finally, I will conclude with my final thoughts. Let’s start off with free will. The theory states that it is the ability to choose without constraint from any outside source of interference (e.g. social pressures, religion, law). By this theory, one can assume that any action is done by the will of the individual, which in turn proves that every action done has a sole agent responsible for said action. For example: Tommy goes to the store, he buys bananas. His mom calls and asks him to pick up some juice while he’s there. Note that Tommy may be naturally inclined to fulfill his mom’s request, but in no way is he out of control what choice he makes. Notice: inclined. He would likely choose to buy the juice as well as his bananas, because he is a good son and doesn’t mind spending the money for juice. He could also completely ignore what his mom says...
Words: 937 - Pages: 4
