Arguments Against Libertarianism

711 Words2 Pages

Assignment 8
Section 10 – Karen E Rice – Thursday 5-5:50

1. According to Campbell, a person’s act is deemed self-caused if and only if that individual is the sole cause of that specific action and thus entirely morally responsible. In other words, no other agent or entry other than the self can influence the act otherwise the act is not one that the self is completely morally responsible. An example of an act that is not self-caused is drinking alcohol due to peer pressure. This is because other individuals besides the self are influencing the occurrence of this specific action, in this case drinking alcohol.

2. This is because, according to Campbell, there are certain actions in which the agent is the sole cause, but the act is necessitated …show more content…

This is because of Campbell’s reasoning that one’s formed character solely prescribes the nature of the situation of moral temptation and does not in fact have any tangible influence in determining an individual’s act of decision. This is because, according to Campbell, in the situation of moral temptation, formed character merely determines the felt balance of one’s desires. Therefore, from this logic Campbell is able to claim that the act of moral decision is self-determined.

7. The main criticism Campbell raises against his view is the philosophy of Libertarianism. According to Campbell, Libertarianism not only holds that a moral decision is the self’s act, but also asserts that this act is not influenced by any features within the self’s nature and character. Campbell responds to it by exposing the inner contradiction between Libertarian’s two propositions. More specifically, Campbell claims that Libertarianism is fundamentally flawed because for Campbell, the act of moral decision is necessarily determined by the self’s character.

8. In this paragraph, Campbell asserts that the act of moral decision could be in one sense “unintelligible” if it were meaningless. For example, a critic could contend that returning a missing wallet, for ultimate analysis, is essentially a meaningless act. However, Campbell firmly holds that his doctrine of Determinism is perfectly intelligible and thus not

Show More
Related

  • Libertarianism Pros And Cons

    223 Words  | 1 Pages

    The Libertarian Party is considered America’s largest third party and believe in total individual liberty including pro-drug legalization, pro-choice, pro-home schooling etc. They also believe in total economic freedom which means they want a traditional laissez-faire approach. They believe that there is a correlation between lower government and more freedom. They want each person to have as much individual rights as they possibly can.

    Read More

  • Hume's and Anscombe's View on Causation

    1237 Words  | 3 Pages

    Hume defines causation in terms of natural necessity and explains natural necessity as follows: of two events, if event A and always event B, then there is a “natural relation” or a “natural association” between the two; this is the kind of reasoning Hume uses to explain natural necessity between things. Here is another way to put it: if A causes B there is a “natural relation” between the two. In other words, the two events are similar.

    Read More

  • Free Will and Determinism of Ayer and Holbach

    1810 Words  | 4 Pages

    In respect to the arguments of Ayer and Holbach, the dilemma of determinism and its compatibility with that of free will are found to be in question. Holbach makes a strong case for hard determinism in his System of Nature, in which he defines determinism to be a doctrine that everything and most importantly human actions are caused, and it follows that we are not free and therefore haven’t any moral responsibility in regard to our actions. For Ayer, a compatibilist believing that free will is compatible with determinism, it is the reconciliation and dissolution of the problem of determinism and moral responsibility with free willing that is argued. Ayer believes that this problem can be dissolved by the clarification of language usage and the clarification of what freedom is in relationship to those things that oppose freedom or restrain it. In either case, what is at stake is the free will of an agent, and whether or not that agent is morally responsible. What is to be seen from a discussion of these arguments is the applicability and validity of these two philosophies to situations where one must make a choice, and whether or not that person is acting freely and is thus responsible given his current situation. In this vein, the case of Socrates’ imprisonment and whether or not he acted freely in respect to his decision to leave or stay in prison can be evaluated by the discussion of the arguments presented in respect to the nature of free will in its reconciliation with determinism in the compatibilist vein and its absence in the causality of hard determinism.

    Read More

  • Determinism and Free Will: A Philosophical Analysis

    1271 Words  | 3 Pages

    The connection between free will and moral responsibility has been a heavily debated topic by early philosophers with many ancient thinkers trying to demonstrate that humans either do have ultimate control over our actions and are not made by external forces or that humans do not have control and that the trajectory of our lives is pre-determined. The most common argument and the one I will focus on in this essay suggests that free will can not be correlated with randomness and, therefore, all other possibilities are exhausted.

    Read More

  • Examining Frankfurt's Views on Love and Obligations

    883 Words  | 2 Pages

    justifies his statement of the absence of a moral imperative it becomes quite a bit more

    Read More

  • Free Will Theory: Detterminists And Indeterminist Theory

    1521 Words  | 4 Pages

    Philosophers have developed many different theories to explain the existence and behavior of “free will.” This classical debate has created two main family trees of theories, with multiple layers and overlapping. It all begins with Determinist and Indeterminist theories. Simply put, determinists believe that our choices are determined by circumstance, and that the freedom to make our own decisions does not exist. Indeterminists, for example Libertarians, believe that we are free to make our own choices; these choices are not determined by other factors, like prior events. In class, we began the discussion of free will, and the competing arguments of Determinists and Indeterminists, with the works of Roderick Chisholm, a libertarian who made

    Read More

  • Setonia Case Study

    1044 Words  | 3 Pages

    “2. Causation (the person who is being brought into the court actually caused the injury)

    Read More

  • Libertarianism

    1135 Words  | 3 Pages

    With Campbell’s argument entirely laid out, the final question remains: is it sound? Based on the premises of his arguments as I see them, I believe I am safe in saying that yes, his argument is sound. Campbell has explained his premises clearly enough to persuade me into his manner of thinking. The only threat to his argument that I see lies in the his rebuttal of the meaninglessness criticism. I feel that he did not respond to this critique head on. Campbell claims that only the person making the moral choice can be aware of the reasons he made that choice. He, also, claimed that even a Determinist placed in a position of moral choice, has to be aware of his freedom of decision, but, if that is true, how do the advocates of meaninglessness fail to see the reason behind the choices they have made? This is the only point I am aware of that can jeopardize the soundness of Campbell’s argument. If he can explain this, he will have made a libertarian out of me.

    Read More

  • Libertarianism is the Best Philosophy

    1632 Words  | 4 Pages

    Campbell’s view on Libertarianism is quite simple. Campbell suggests that one needs to judge people by their inner acts or intentions to understand free will. To have freedom one must have a precondition of moral responsibility as well as a categorical analysis of free...

    Read More

  • Analysis of Roderick Chisholm's 'Human Freedom and the Self'

    1447 Words  | 3 Pages

    In effect, a concept that is not the result of everything that has happened before the action and that is not completely random nor unfounded. Is it possible that the concept of free will falls in this category? For an action to be held as done “freely” it must meet certain criteria described by Chisholm. In effect, the conditions he sets out state that the action must not be caused by prior events, must not occur by just chance and the actions must not be uncaused. In other words for something to be considered free will the agent must cause it and not be under any constraint. This appears to severely limit what we would be able to define as freewill. Even Chisholm notes that it is difficult to find an event that could be caused by an agent while also not being caused by any previous event. However, to say that the agent caused the event is just another way to detail the event causation and does not add anything of value to the to the description of that specific causal event or resulting events. In the opinion of Chisholm this is quite frankly a mistake. In his view, the only reason it seems at all reasonable that we would correlate immanent-causation with transeunt-causation is simply that we do not have a strong enough grasp on the idea of causation as a whole. To this he offers the example of a man moving his hand. Through this example he describes to us that although

    Read More

  • Free Will and Determinism

    1633 Words  | 4 Pages

    The problem of free will and determinism is a mystery about what human beings are able to do. The best way to describe it is to think of the alternatives taken into consideration when someone is deciding what to do, as being parts of various “alternative features” (Van-Inwagen). Robert Kane argues for a new version of libertarianism with an indeterminist element. He believes that deeper freedom is not an illusion. Derk Pereboom takes an agnostic approach about causal determinism and sees himself as a hard incompatibilist. I will argue against Kane and for Pereboom, because I believe that Kane struggles to present an argument that is compatible with the latest scientific views of the world.

    Read More

  • Agent Causation and Dualism

    1639 Words  | 4 Pages

    If we are to say that an event is not caused by another event but by something else, we are left to decipher what the cause could be. This cause, given free will, could only come from the agent himself. “If there is an event that is caused, not by other events, but by the man, then there are some events involved in the act that are not caused by other events” (Chisholm 28). I would agree with Chisholm’s assessment here, and would add that this is not only a material conditional, but is, in fact, true. There is something special about an agent, a particular property which he possesses, that allows him to cause certain events deliberately without the influence of a prior event. His decision-making processes, the neuron firings in his brain, and his own deliberative power serve as the cause for numerous actions which cannot be attributed to other events.

    Read More

  • Bernard Williams's Critique Of Kantian Moral Theory

    1104 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this paper, I will argue that Kant provides us with a plausible account of morality. To demonstrate that, I will initially offer a main criticism of Kantian moral theory, through explaining Bernard Williams’ charge against it. I will look at his indulgent of the Kantian theory, and then clarify whether I find it objectionable. The second part, I will try to defend Kant’s theory.

    Read More

  • Arnold: Factual Causation

    1605 Words  | 4 Pages

    The requirements for legal causation is that it must be a factual cause but most importantly, it must be ‘proximate’ . The grounds for whether an act is proximate is the test that

    Read More

  • Of Necessity and Liberty

    1690 Words  | 4 Pages

    In the debate regarding liberty (i.e. free-will) and necessity (i.e. causal determinism), Hume places himself firmly in the compatibilist camp by arguing that both notions can be reconciled. Though some of the arguments he presents in the Enquiry are unconvincing, Hume nonetheless still contributes to compatibilism by defining free-will and determinism in such a way as to avoid the logic of the incompatibilist position.

    Read More

More about Arguments Against Libertarianism

Open Document