Free Will In John Strawson's The Basic Argument

Strawson’s “The Basic Argument” claims that free will does not exist and that each and every individual cannot be held morally responsible for their actions. My interpretation after reading the persuasive essay is that this notion is correct. Before reading the excerpt from Strawson’s argument, free will was a point of mental struggle. I have often throughout my life thought of the teaching of free will I have grown up with; a religious based one. To me, the argument of free will never seemed whole. We can make our own choices, but God will always know what is going to happen and what choice you are going to make. That is not free will; it is an illusion of free will. Our choices are always influenced whether or not that influence is directly asserted at the moment of the decision. As Strawson states, “it is undeniable that one is the way one is, initially, as a result

The choices that people make are made within the limits of “how they are.” People act as reactions to the things they are taught are morally and socially acceptable or unacceptable. People are also forced to act within the physical restraints of their location, height, weight, etc. These are all outside influences and not organic of the person’s inner being in that time and place. “To be responsible for how one acts, one must be responsible for how one is” which, according to Strawson, is impossible because of the outside influences we have steadily received from our families, those that we know and interact with, and society throughout our entire lives. Because of this outside influence we are no longer organic people and our thoughts, actions, and selves are derived from these influences. We still make choices, only those conclusions are not arrived to from simply our own thought processes. Every thought we have is impacted by an outward force that has shaped us both individually and collectively as the society we are