ipl-logo

Determinism Vs Free Will

1777 Words8 Pages

Determinism, free will and moral responsibility (1681 words)

Table of contents:
Introduction.
Blatchford’s view on determinism, free will, and moral responsibility.
Schlick’s determinism, freedom and responsibility.
Hospers’s position.
C. A. Campbell’s arguments.
Taylor’s philosophy.
Conclusion.

1. In western philosophy such terms as determinism, free will, and moral responsibility are treated differently by different authors. There are three main positions on determinism, free will, and moral responsibility. Those who adhere with hard determinism assert that everything in our world and our actions are predetermined, and decisions we make are not completely ours; moral responsibility is the reflection of free will. Soft determinism philosophers’ …show more content…

Moritz Schlick is a representative of logical positivism doctrine. His definition of free will, determinism and moral responsibility derives from the definition of punishment. He supposes that “Punishment is an educative measure, and as such is a means to the formation of motives, which are in part to prevent the wrongdoer from repeating the act (reformation) and in part to prevent others from committing a similar act (intimidation). Analogously, in the case of reward we are concerned with an incentive." (Schlick, p. 152). So, Schlick’s view of free will and responsibility is connected with punishment. He supposes that a person in responsible if the punishment for his action is able to change his behavior in the future. So, his determinism differs a little from that of Blatchford. In his point of view, "we are trying to discover who is ultimately responsible" (D'Angelo, p. 37). So, he thinks that moral responsibility is not derived from heredity and environment. But what is the source of free will and moral responsibility? Schlick doesn’t give any unequivocal answer to this question. I think that moral responsibility depends on the scale of free will of a person and his attitude to the actions of other persons. In other words, our behaviour is the result of both our heredity and nature, and some outside factors which depend on our relation to other persons’ …show more content…

Taylor’s philosophy and view on determinism, free will and moral responsibility reflects the libertarian philosophic position. He attaches large importance to free will and free choice of a person. Taylor asserts that “certain events (namely, human choices) are not completely determined by preceding events; rather, they are caused by the agent of the choice (the person doing the choosing)” (Free Will). This view differs from that of Blatchford, Schlick and Hospers who deny free choice concluding that everything is determined in our decisions and actions. But real free will, according to Taylor, appears in case of strong evaluations which determine important actions and decisions. Taylor, as well as Campbell, supposes that a person who makes acts has free choice to act in another way. And, “according to our definition, the act was freely performed. So not only would such acts be free, but they are also acts for which someone could be held morally responsible” (Free Will). So, Taylor assumes that moral responsibility is reflected in free choice of a person. I support his point of view and think that not only the laws of heredity and nature determine our behaviour – this approach decreases the importance of rational factors. In other words, I adhere with the libertarian view which “maintains that there are acts which are not completely determined by preceding events and the laws of nature, but which are not just random” (Free

Show More
Related
1508 Words | 7 Pages

In the paper “Sanity and the Metaphysics of Responsibility”, Susan Wolf discusses her ideas on what is necessary for an individual to be responsible for their actions. She argues that in order for the person to be held morally responsible for their actions, they need to be morally sane. To consider one to be morally sane, this individual must have an ideology that is able for them to distinguish right from wrong. Hence, a morally sane person must be able to reason and have a sound mind. Furthermore, Wolf establishes the sane deep-self view by applying other philosopher’s ideas.

Read More
878 Words | 4 Pages

Lucy Bichakhchyan Introduction to Philosophy Second Short Written Assignment GALEN STRAWSON THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF MORAL RESPONSIBILITY Galen Strawson is a British philosopher, who is famous for his philosophical works on free will, panpsychism, causality, determinism etc. This paper is about his article “The Impossibility of Moral Responsibility”. The title of the article already gives away the stand that Strawson has considering Moral Responsibility..

Read More
420 Words | 2 Pages

In Thomas Nagel’s response to Bernard William’s, Moral Luck, Nagel questions whether our “moral goodness” or “moral badness” is simply a matter of sheer luck. Judging if someone is in fact “good” or “bad” or in other words, the way we are, the circumstances we face and, the way things turn out are indeed caused by luck. In this paper, I will confirm Nagel’s assertions in that the way things turn out, how we respond to given situations, and how one was raised are all a matter of luck in deciding ones moral goodness or badness. Being morally good or bad is just about how we are, and our temperaments. One’s background or upbringing can affect the outcome of one’s judgment, and that judgment is essentially what determines morality.

Read More
1445 Words | 6 Pages

In "Human Freedom and the Self", Roderick Chisholm has taken a libertarian approach on the issue of free will and determinism. Libertarians believe that humans have free will and make a distinction that free will and determinism are incompatible. Chisholm has the same opinion. On the problem of human freedom, Chisholm thinks that “Human beings are responsible agents; but this fact appears to conflict with a deterministic view of human action (the view that every event that is involved in an act is caused by some other event); and it also appears to conflict with an indeterministic view of human action (the view that the act, or some event that is essential to the act, is not caused at all).”(Page 3). He does not agree that determinism or indeterminism

Read More
498 Words | 2 Pages

Fried discusses the view points on free will in mostly two groups; compatibilism which is that both free will and determination exist, and incompatibilism which is what we called Hard determinism in class, or the notion that everything is determined and there is no free will. Since

Read More
1054 Words | 5 Pages

One of Swinburne’s main arguments is that God gave humans the freedom to choose between good and evil. If an individual has a choice between good and bad choices, and if that individual chooses to do good, it shows stronger compassion towards humanity than it would if the individual had no choice but to do good. Swinburne argues that giving people a moral responsibility to do the right thing is good: "If humans are to have the free choice of bringing about good or evil, and the free choice thereby of gradually forming their characters, then it is logically necessary that there be the possibility of the occurrence of moral evil unprevented by God." (Swinburne, 2004). Swinburne believes that the freedom to choose and develop one’s character is a paramount thing and every individual deserves to have the ability to make a choice between good and evil.

Read More
1495 Words | 6 Pages

In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, he outlines the different scenarios in which one is responsible for her actions.  There is, however, a possible objection which raises the possibility that nobody is responsible for their actions.  Are we responsible for some of our actions after all?   If so, under what circumstances?

Read More
786 Words | 4 Pages

Yet, one must be causa sui to achieve true moral responsibility. Hence, nothing is able to truly be morally responsible. Strawson 's whole purpose of writing the article is to change anyone 's mind who says that we should be responsible for the way we are and what we do as a result of the way we are. He believes we are lacking freedom and control of doing so. He argues that if we do something for a reason, that is how we are, so we must be responsible.

Read More
889 Words | 4 Pages

William James thought the real problem was not understanding freedom, but rather knowing what determinism was. Determinism could be looked at as a belief. Indeterminism is not to accept this, but accept the alternatives. The world could be viewed as deterministic or in deterministic. There is no correct view because it brings conclusions only on facts we have.

Read More
1207 Words | 5 Pages

External factors and past experiences may influence decisions as they may make an individual more likely to want to do something, however, people are capable of making that final decision on their own. Thus, supporting compatibilism. Erich Froman stated “All of us have the potential to control our lives, but many of us are too afraid to do so. As a result, we give up our freedom and allow our lives to be governed by circumstance, other people or irrational feelings. Freedom on its own is the definition of the ability to make our own decisions that it be good or evil”.

Read More
334 Words | 2 Pages

Both hard and soft determinists believe that all actions are determined; however, soft determinists believe in responsibility, which is the result of freedom. Hard determinists advocate the idea of predetermined or predestined actions with no free will. On the other hand, soft determinists or compatibilist contend that there is a blend of determinism and free will. As a hard determinist, Baron d’Holbach believed that independent forces create desires that dictate an individual’s behavior. In contrast, Joseph Campbell explained that individuals have either have an ‘all-in ability’ and/or general ability.

Read More
1277 Words | 6 Pages

“I believe the freedom to choose my course in life but I do not believe I am free to choose the consequences of my

Read More
959 Words | 4 Pages

It is impossible and illogical to hold people to different standards of freedom and determinism. These are metaphysical aspects. They concern the nature of reality and reality is not so fickle as to apply different standards of truth to different people. Due to this, everybody has limited freedom. Fate, environment, character, religion, and so on formed throughout a person’s life would cause a limited number of possibilities to be open for that person.

Read More
1088 Words | 5 Pages

(75). Here, Augustine states outright that humans have the ability to act on their own accordance, even though God is aware of what will happen. Also, evidence of humanity’s free will is found in The Bible. In Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians states that, “No testing has overtaken you that is not common to everyone. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tested beyond your strength, but with the testing he will also provide the way out so that you may be able to endure it.”

Read More
823 Words | 4 Pages

He states in his essay, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, that “a man in respect of willing, or the act of volition, when any action in his power is once proposed to his thoughts...cannot be free” (§23). That is, a man is not at liberty to decide whether or not to will. For instance, if he is presented with a thought, which leads to the willing of an action or nonaction (that is in his power) in accordance with that

Read More

More about Determinism Vs Free Will

Related Topics

Open Document