Determinism And Free Will Essay

Are we as humans truly free? This is a question that many individuals often wonder about their freedom even though there is this common sense that we just are. Though we feel like we are free and think that we have the choice to make the decisions we do, and that everything that has occurred is because of our decisions, does this verify that we are in fact free? Are we bound by nature and its functioning? Or rather do we have freedom, yet everything is still at the same time determined? This research paper will argue for the concept of determinism and how humans should think about free will, while answering to objections from libertarianism and compatibilism. Determinism will be proven as the way by which free will should be thought as it provides

People who believe in this theory are confident that individuals make choices that cause their beliefs and actions and that those choices made, are wholly due to their own choosing. Though this is a popular belief, it is not a logical case for believing humans have free will. If a reason for something cannot be found for why we feel a certain way, and in this case free, philosophy rejects it. Therefore, this reasoning of free will is irrational as there is no evidence to support it. On one end of the continuum is the belief in total free will, on the other end is the belief that free will does not exist. However, there is middle ground in a third concept by which has pieces of both sides contributing to this one notion. This concept is compatibilism, which believes somewhat like determinists, that the universe operates with law like order. Thus, the past determines the future, and though compatibilists believe this they also believe some of the actions taken by humans really are free. Though every action is free to a compatibilist there is no way by which something couldn’t not happen, therefore everything is determined. However, humans still have a freedom according to compatibilist by which they have moral responsibility and thus must admit to their thought and actions as their own. Though these two theories each provide their own structure on

In response to the objection, why would God voluntarily want to be loved by some humans, and then when they die he is loved on them like a gumball machine? In other words, why would God want all of this love from someone all of a sudden continuously being spat out at him? Seems as though it is an irrational point that makes no sense because of the inconsistency of it as well as free will with the objective that a mere feeling can create true concept without reasoning. However, this very reason makes this objection completely illogical as indeterminists tend to put the cart before the horse. This means that they are believing in an outcome without a cause which completely goes against the natural functioning of the world in which determinism may present it as the domino effect. The domino effect signifies that for every action there must be a cause. Human beings are material beings and therefore they are subject to the causal laws of nature according to Baron d’Holbach. For he contends that, although humans do have a will, this will be not free as it may seem but rather, it inevitably chooses what it believes will be most advantageous to the individual (Abel 267). For example, Zenos arrow and the idea of motion. For there is no moment when the arrow is actually moving, thought it was released by a bow, no thing or the arrow truly