Freedom And Determinism: The Philosophical Journey An Interactive Approach

Kristina Deloury

John Johnston

Philosophy 10

7 March 2015

Freedom and Determinism It's 12 o'clock pm and almost time for the construction worker's lunch break. He's been slaving away all day in the eighty degree, southern california weather. His stomach starts to growl and the scent of all the surrounding food establishments seems to be growing more intense. As soon as the clock strikes 12:30 he heads straight for a fresh, cold cut, deli sandwich from Sandwich Heaven, across from where he works. After lunch his coworker asks him why he didn't go to Superb Soup like he usually does, or the new taco shop he had been ranting about trying. He replied by saying he felt like a sandwich today. He freely made the choice to have a sandwich... or did

There are three positions on how to answer the previous question: libertarianism, compatibilism, and hard determinism. All three viewpoints have similarities and differences on why one acts they way they do and whether or not one can be held morally responsible for those actions. Are we free or determined? Before answering that question we must first look at the definition of freedom that is relevant to philosophy. According to The Philosophical Journey An Interactive Approach by William F. Lawhead, two types of freedom are relevant to philosophy. These two types of freedom are circumstantial freedom and metaphysical freedom. Circumstantial freedom is when we “have the ability and the opportunity to perform whatever action we choose” (Lawhead). Lawhead then explains that this means we are free from outside forces, hinderances, and “natural limitations” that limit or force our actions. This is the freedom to carry out an act without interference from a draw back. For example, like Schmid says, “You are not free to vote if someone locks you in the trunk of their car.” Circumstantial freedom is a negative freedom, and it doesn't explain how choices come

When one thinks about 'free will', they are thinking metaphysical freedom. They're ultimately the same thing. Opposed to circumstantial freedom, metaphysical freedom is based on our internal condition, and explains that one's self is the “creative, originating cause of a decision or action” (Lawhead 266). You can express the issue of freedom and determinism in a systematic way. This systematic way is made up of three statements and how each statement is responded to. Statement one is “We are determined” , statement two is “ If we are determined, then we lack the freedom necessary to be morally responsible,” and statement three is “ We do have the freedom necessary to be morally responsible” (Lawhead). When reading these statements, you can accept two and discard one. All three cannot be