Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Social influences on behaviour
Conflict between free will and determinism
Conflict between free will and determinism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Social influences on behaviour
t is intriguing that when a person is presented with the ideas of free will or determinism, they usually jump rather quickly to the conclusion of free will. Most people appreciate the genuine freedom that accompanies choice, but do we really possess it? Complete free will would mean that our decisions would be unrelated to other factors such as the environment or genetics. In reality, our free decisions are based on factors that are beyond our own control. When exercising certain choices, we conclude that we have acted freely and distinguish our actions from situations in which we believe were not in our control. The events that are not in our control are pre-determined for us, which lead us on a path to a determined life. Even though we may be making our own unique decisions, they all connect to form a single planned outcome.
Free will is commonly believed to be an issue of common sense. For example, someone may argue that they chose what they are wearing today and therefore posses free will. It does not occur to them that some other factor could have influenced them to think in that manner, essentially meaning that their decision was pre-determined. Free will may give you a choice, but you would have never had that option if not for a determined factor from the surrounding society or environment. What people fail to realize is that determinism does not strictly mean that there exists a rule book of every event that has taken place or will take place in the future. Determinism also does not mean that the future is in the hands of a “creator” who is simply following a “plan”. Instead, determinism can be viewed as something that happens subconsciously, or even at an anatomic level.
When situations do not go as plann...
... middle of paper ...
...they would be a victim to the strange and irrational behavior brought on by their illness throughout their entire life. Any effort to change their behavioral patters would be useless because you cannot alter a predetermined way of life.
The belief that our realities are a result of various determined factors, such as the environment around us, is especially rational. Even though determinism exists, it does not rule out responsibility and freedom. The view that people choose to act independently out of free will only goes so far. Often, violence or other external factors are the root of various human behavior. When this happens, the event is not caused by something in the person, but rather a predetermined factor. Ultimately, individuals do have a choice, but the behavior they exhibit is always subject to some type of environmental or biological determinism.
Imagine starting your day and not having a clue of what to do, but you begin to list the different options and routes you can take to eventually get from point A to point B. In choosing from that list, there coins the term “free will”. Free will is our ability to make decisions not caused by external factors or any other impediments that can stop us to do so. Being part of the human species, we would like to believe that we have “freedom from causation” because it is part of our human nature to believe that we are independent entities and our thoughts are produced from inside of us, on our own. At the other end of the spectrum, there is determinism. Determinism explains that all of our actions are already determined by certain external causes
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.
Believing in determinism is not something that means a complete loss of free will yet it is difficult to see whether we have free will if everything that will be for us is already planned and waiting to come out. Looking at the surface of determinism one may believe that strict determinism if believed and followed may lend itself to chaos in society. Free will is a matter of choice although the principle of sufficient reason charges that the choice is something where they could not have done otherwise dependent on prior events depending on prior events to infinity.
Many people often wonder what influences their choices, why they do the things they do, and why the world functions the way it does. Many like to argue that people make the choices they make because things are determined by nature and nurture, not other factors. Others like to argue that people have full control over the choices they make and there are no constraining factors. In this paper I will demonstrate that determinism is false and that people are not typically determined by nature and nurture to perform the evil actions they do. I will identify what determinism is, the different forms of determinism, why people find it to be true, why I find it false, and show different examples of why.
The modern field of cognitive science combines research from fields such as computer science, psychology, linguistics, and neuroscience in order to study the processes of the mind. Using a framework of representational structures and operational procedures, cognitive science has been able to make significant contributions to the study of cognition and information processing. This interdisciplinary approach has been so successful that its application has been extended to areas like metaphysics, which was once considered to be outside the realm of empirical study; theorists hope that cognitive science may provide insight into questions related to the fundamental nature of existence, such as the debate between free will and determinism.
The discussion of free will and its compatibility with determinism comes down to one’s conception of actions. Most philosophers and physicists would agree that events have specific causes, especially events in nature. The question becomes more controversial when philosophers discuss the interaction between human beings, or agents, and the world. If one holds the belief that all actions and events are caused by prior events, it would seem as though he would be accepting determinism. For if an event has a particular cause, the event which follows must be predetermined, even if this cause relates to a decision by a human being. Agent causation becomes important for many philosophers who, like me, refuse to accept the absence of free will in the universe.
Determinism is easiest under stood through analogy. Think of the universe as a bunch of billiard balls in a three dimensional pool table called space. If one were to know all the forces acting on these balls at any time it would be possible to extrapolate all future or past positions. This creates determinism and determinism destroys free will. The best example of this phenomenon in society would be the partisan political system and foreign policy. Sociologists and the public in general, see themselves and each other as one of these pool balls being kicked around. In this environment neither self-worth nor confidence is cultivated. These traits are vital in a society that increasingly asks its population to work unsupervised and off of the job site.
Determinism currently takes two related forms: hard determinism and soft determinism [1][1]. Hard determinism claims that the human personality is subject to, and a product of, natural forces. All of our choices can be accounted for by reference to environmental, social, cultural, physiological and hereditary (biological) causes. Our total character is a product of these environmental, social, cultural, physiological and hereditary forces, thus our beliefs, desires, values and habits are all outside of our control. The hard determinist, therefore, claims that our choices are determined by these factors; free will is an illusion because the choices and decisions we make are derived from our character, which is completely out of our control in creating. An example might help illustrate this point. Consider a man who has just repeatedly stabbed another man outside of a bar; the other man is dead. The hard determinist would argue that there were factors outside of the killer’s control which led him to this action. As a child, he was constantly beaten by his father and was the object of ridicule and contempt of his classmates. This trend of hard luck would continue all his life. Coupled with the fact that he has a gene that has been identified with male aggression, he could not control himself when he pulled the knife out and started stabbing the other man. All this aggression, and all this history were the determinate cause of his action.
All humans have some concept of free will (the capability to make rational and free choices) and we exercise our free will regularly. As humans we can choose go to a movie, perform a criminal act, say a prayer ,leap off of a bridge ,or paint the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.We are in control of many of our choices, and thus our destiny - that we are free to think and decide. According to the twentieth century English philosopher Martin Hollis, “free will—the ability to make decisions about how to act— is what distinguishes people from non-human animals and machines”, (Ellsworth, p.25).We contrast this flexible, conscious control that we enjoy with the involuntary action of, say, our heartbeat or digestion, and with the instinctual imperative of a bird's nest-building or a dog's conditioned response (Timpe, Kevin). Our decisions are far more independent of nature and nurture than any animal's; we are aware of our ability to think and of the consequences of our choices.
This is opposite of what determinism claim. Determinism, as it is taught in ITT-Tech textbooks, claims that moral judgements are pre-determined, and there exist no other course of action. For example, those who believe in determinism would argue that I did not decide to write this paper of my own free will, but that it was predermined that I would write it, and therefore, I wrote this paper. However, I believe this to be just another groundless argument that deflects individual responsibility onto something or someone else. If a person's actions or moral judgements are predetermined, then it presuposes that a person does not have the free will to do something else. If this were true, then we can not justifiably hold someone accountable for their actions, thus, it requires us to abandon the notion of individual responsibility, accountability, and achomplishments (perhaps in our country we already
We as humans have the choice to decide whether we believe we are free or that everything in life is caused due to past events. This debate is brought up when you look at both Determinism and Libertarianism. Both theories draw their own perspective from people. What you chose to believe is entirely what you feel to be true, but you can’t hold both views. You either have to side with a libertarianism or hard determinism standpoint.
The power of a rational human being is the ability to make choices. These choices and your ability to choose, is the existence of your free will. Though this free will exists and you are able to make your own decisions, the future remains inevitable. The past is constantly being created, as the cycle of time continues. With this given past, there will only be one actual inevitable future. This notion is what philosophers call a deterministic world. How can free will be compatible with this world, is the question. I am arguing that a deterministic world can contain individuals that have the ability to make choices among a variety of options, while the actual choices made is already determined.
Do we truly have free will? It is the ability to make a decision without hindrance. Human nature, neuroscience, and everyday life are contributing factors to free will.
Freedom, or the concept of free will seems to be an elusive theory, yet many of us believe in it implicitly. On the opposite end of the spectrum of philosophical theories regarding freedom is determinism, which poses a direct threat to human free will. If outside forces of which I have no control over influence everything I do throughout my life, I cannot say I am a free agent and the author of my own actions. Since I have neither the power to change the laws of nature, nor to change the past, I am unable to attribute freedom of choice to myself. However, understanding the meaning of free will is necessary in order to decide whether or not it exists (Orloff, 2002).
Similarly, liberty is in contrast with the concept of determinism, or the idea that human beings have absolutely no free will and cannot be held morally responsible for their actions. Determinism is a doctrine that all events are determined by an external cause, including that of human actions. With this concept, it is believed that no one had free will or liberty, and as such no one can infringe on the rights of others, as they do not