ipl-logo

Soft Determinism Vs Libertarianism

731 Words3 Pages

Out of the three philosophers and the three views that we have studied, I believe that Ayer has the most convincing view. His view is a combination between Libertarianism, which supports the idea that we do have free will, and Hard Determinism, which denies the freedom of the will and says that it is only an illusion. In a way, these two ideas are opposites but Ayer holds this view and it is known as Soft Determinism or Compatibilism. This view accepts the argument that we are determined (premise 1 from the argument on page 333) but rejects that determinism implies that we are not free to choose our actions (premise 2 from the argument on page 333). Ayer believes that we can make free will compatible with determinism, hence why it is known …show more content…

Why do we hold people accountable if their lives are pre-determined? The same problem arises from a libertarian view that since it acts on pure chance and there is no principle of universal causality, then everything must just be an accident so people's actions are unpredictable making them unreliable for their actions so if they were to do something bad they should not be punished or if they do something good they should not be praised because every choice acts on pure chance and …show more content…

Libertarianism and Hard Determinism both have flaws in the way that its ideas are presented. Hard Determinism is flawed because it gives people no moral responsibility and freedom to choose, making people who do bad things have an excuse in court to be not guilty. Same goes for Libertarianism because it acts on pure chance and rejects the principle of universal causality which means that since people are unpredictable and they act on chance, it is not their fault for doing something wrong or giving them credibility for doing something good. Compatibilism is the best view because in a way we are determined but we have the will to make our own choices because of our internal

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
644 Words | 3 Pages

Destiny over Free will Free will is a term unheard of nowhere days because of how much the media portrays that we have to do what other people say such as politicians. Some people are destined to think that everything we say and do has already been written out in a script somewhere in heaven and that God already knows what we are going to do before we even do it. People do not possess free will but are governed by fate because in Dante's Inferno the people who were brought down to hell were brought down because they were destined to go down the wrong path and that's why they are in hell and there are special places for people whose fate was a little too heinous and they were forced to go in the middle of heaven and hell and sometimes other people are also destined to lead us to our fate such as Virgil in Dante's inferno. People do not possess free will but are governed by fate because we think we have a choice to change our decisions but what if

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
470 Words | 2 Pages

A philosopher named John Locke believed that people should be free to do what they want, but if their choices are poor, then they should be ready to face the consequences. In his justification, he asserts that “We must consider what state men are naturally in... a state of perfect freedom to order their actions and dispose

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
265 Words | 2 Pages

Hard determinists and compatibilists may raise objections to this explanation. One of the major objections that they could ask is what is so special about human beings? Libertarians seem to be ok explaining every other event in the world through causal determinism. Yet, they appeal to this distinct sense of agent causation when it comes to humans. In response, libertarians would argue that humans are distinct from most everything in the natural world.

Read More
1267 Words | 6 Pages

Libertarians believe that each person owns his own life and property and has the right to make his own choices as to how he lives his life and uses his property – as long as he simply respects the equal right of others to do the same.” (theadvocates.org). Libertarians believe in three policies, no paternalism, no morals legislation, and no redistribution of income or wealth (Sandel,59). No paternalism, is against the laws that protect individuals from harm, so essentially it’s saying that if an individual decides to partake in reckless behavior and no one but the individual performing the risky behavior is harmed or affected, there should be no laws preventing the individual from performing that behavior (for example, not wearing a seatbelt). No

Read More
777 Words | 4 Pages

Equally people will say that that they should and shouldn 't be held accountable on this life or death situations. For instance… people have chosen this situation that they want to do and they know that they could be held accountable like for example in the story the life of pi, the boy was on a raft with the tiger and they were on each side of the boat but the boy was scared of getting eat by the tiger because the tiger had that look in his eyes of hunger so the boy decided to make a raft near the boat so he would still be alive. They should not be held accountable for this because it is there life and their choosing what they want to do to be free or take something off a bucket list. However... people can chose of what they want to do but they need to think before they do it to test if they are ready for it or that they won 't be scared and know the consequences of what might happen. Also how people even though they don 't know they should have checked first.

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
1707 Words | 7 Pages

We should not be held accountable for the actions that we did not mean to do in survival

Read More
1777 Words | 8 Pages

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.

Read More
1218 Words | 5 Pages

One cannot control what happens to his or her own life - this is how fate impacts people’s lives - but one can control how he or she responds to events, showing that humans do have free will. If humans really choose their own values and essence, as Sartre postulates, then

Read More
1202 Words | 5 Pages

Fate, by definition, is the universal principle by which the order of things is seemingly prescribed. (Webster) Essentially, fate is events that are inevitable that we have no power to change. It is debatable that fate exists among everyone; however, humans are subject to making their own choices- free will. No matter what choices people make, they do not change our fate.

Read More
931 Words | 4 Pages

Berlin first explicitly defined the ideas of negative and positive freedom. In negative sense Berlin states “What is the area within which the subject - a person or group of persons - is or should be left to do what he is able to do or be, without interference by other persons” . 'Negative freedom is the freedom from interference from others; it is the benefit of being alone and not impeded. The range of negative liberty is larger if the non-interference is larger. Berlin states that law ought to restrict the negative liberty in order to enjoy it at minimum.

Read More

More about Soft Determinism Vs Libertarianism

Related Topics

Open Document