...Class: Date: Do we have Free Will? Yes. The issue of whether we have a free will or not is disputable. For the purpose of this study, I will look into what others have said about this topic. First, I will consider the opinions of three writers who have written contrary to my opinion supporting their argument with the reasons they have given. Secondly, I will analyze the opinions of those writers who believe that we have free will. This will of course be followed by supportive argument behind their opinions. On the last section of this study, I will rebut on the two different opinions. It seems that we do not have free will. For as (Merrill 293), the idea of free will is invalid because conditions of free will are not succinctly stated. There exists a problem of stating the conditions due to a foggy idea of the meaning in the cause effect relationships. The notion between the cause effect relationships is based on experience. In other words, this relationship is based on a succession of time. Although the succession in time can be proved in the laboratory, it cannot be consciously proved because a human being can do the same thing twice but with different consciousness. It seems that we do not have free will. For as (Clement Dore 500-501) free will is associated with making choices out of consciousness. Free will knows no coercion and one accepts responsibility for his actions. People engage in logical reasoning in making their day-to-day choices, they also have self-control...
Words: 1346 - Pages: 6
...Free Will and Determinism One issue with human kind as a whole that has been continuing since the beginning of time is the question of free will. Do human beings really have free will, or is our destiny predetermined by fate? To fully take a side, one has to look at and understand both sides of the argument. Firstly there is the concept of Determinism, which is basically that all events are caused by prior events, and that given the causes of a human’s choices or actions, there is no way that that human could have acted otherwise. Obviously, this is incompatible with the concept of free will, because free will suggests that humans do have a choice. Although there are two different sides to the argument of free will, there is compatibilist and libertarianism free will. Compatibilist free will suggests that free will and determinism are compatible. That it is possible for a person to act freely if the action is not caused by an external factor but rather by an internal factor, caused by processes in the brain. Libertarian free will denies that determinism and compatibilism are true and that free will exists. Libertarians define an action as free if the person doing it could have done otherwise, or that is was possible to act differently. I believe that humans do have free will to the extent of their own power, making me a compatibilist. A person cannot stop a car accident from happening and making them late to work, but they can choose to turn around and take a different route...
Words: 774 - Pages: 4
...Fate or Free Will? Unit 4 Individual Project Grislen Dominguez Professor Stephen Ripley Introduction to Philosophy – PHIL201 March 10, 2013 Scientists, philosophers, and sociologists struggle to find the answers to the following questions, what is freedom? How free is the individual within a society? How much of human behavior is determined by environment and genetics? (M.U.S.E, 2010). In my perspective, freedom is the ability for a human being to act as desired, in other words having self-determination and no restrains. In society, individual’s rights are protected by the first amendment of the constitution, which gives freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and so on. However, there are laws that humans must abide by to prevent consequences. Human behavior has been influenced by the environment and genetics to a certain degree, however, every individual is a unique mind or as I call “a different world”, it all depends on an individual perspectives and reactions to certain circumstances. Socrates: What is the definition of determinism? Grislen: Determinism consist that every event has a cause; therefore if human actions are to be considered events, then, all choices made are determined by cause and not free will. Nothing in life is predetermined, the choices we make in life is the only one that can alter our future. Socrates: What is the definition of free will? Grislen: The philosophical term of “free will” consists...
Words: 901 - Pages: 4
...Determinism and Free Will: To What Extent Are Humans Free? Recently, the issue of free will is much concerned to a point where a wide discussion has been sparked. Free will, on any layer, has been considered as the ability of agents to make choices unimpeded by certain factors. It is obvious that humans have a strong sense of freedom, which leads people to believe that they have free will (Caruso 8). On the other hand, there is a scientific view assumes that physical world can be predicted by physical law including human consciousness, which is also known as determinism. Following those debates there comes a moral dilemma: How are we to assign responsibility for our actions if they are caused totally by external environment and passed events (Baer 128)? The underlying problem is, do humans actually have free will? If so, to what extent are humans able to control themselves? The fundamental controversy of free will and determinism, which represents the question of whether freedom of human mind exists, has been debated by numerous scientists and philosophers. This essay will firstly have a brief review on the arguments and viewpoints of free will and determinism of several philosophers, including Blatchford, Hospers and Taylor. Following this, it will compare those assumptions to each other. Finally, the essay will give the author’s own thoughts and debates on this issue. 1. Blatchford’s Arguments Against Free Will Blatchford claims that human will is not free, and is something...
Words: 2092 - Pages: 9
...Have you ever thought about how people were treated in Canada? More specifically, how Human Rights are treated? Well, I had these questions when I started my inquiry, and I’m here to share my answers with you. Hello, my name is Ireen and I hope you enjoy my presentation. Before researching, I had made up the main question that I wanted to answer. That question was, “Are there specific moments where Canada cannot give people their human rights, and if there are some situations, what are they? If Canada is not allowed to not give people the rights they deserve, why isn’t anyone doing anything about it? Do Canadians or others with higher titles know and don’t care?”. At first, I thought that I couldn’t be able to answer my main question as...
Words: 1843 - Pages: 8
...Human Nature Human nature is an intangible idea that no one seems to agree of that which it consists, yet many seem to agree that it does exist. Some philosophers will debate that human nature is inherently good while others will deem human nature as inherently evil. Others think that human nature is to seek the greatest good, happiness, or a moral life. So what makes us human? What separates us as a species yet unites us as well? When searching for universals of humans, many physiological aspects of life can be cited. Human mortality is a largely recognized aspect of being a human. However anything with life, whether it is a plant, animal, man or other, is mortal and has a beginning and an end. So while mortality is something that is found in all humans, it is not exclusively a human quality. We need nourishment to grow and live, but again, so do most other things that have life. We are physically similar, meaning that while there are differences among us, we are all the same species; just as any other species is similar to others in their own species. However, I would consider these qualities as nature, not just human nature. Human nature I believe is something that goes beyond our physiological side. Before I present my argument, I must first define human nature. According to the Oxford Dictionary, human nature is the general psychological characteristics, feelings, and behavioral traits of humankind, regarded as shared by all humans. In...
Words: 1934 - Pages: 8
...“Human actions are causally determined and therefore not free” Discuss. Determinism argues that all human actions are determined as they apply to natural laws. However, to say actions are determined means that human action isn’t free and we do not have free will. Free will is the term given to the idea of human ability to do what we like whenever we like without restraint. I disagree with the claim that human action is not free and I will put forth arguments in this essay to discuss this conclusion. Firstly, libertarians would argue that we freely chose our actions as we have an overall feeling of freedom. This relates to our common experiences of choosing and deciding and when we have to make choices we are open to all other alternatives before making a decision. Surely, we only have the ability to freely choose something if we have free will to do so and if our actions were causally determined then we wouldn’t have other alternatives to decide from. Therefore this strong feeling of free will and freedom to do as we choose to would prove that human actions isn’t causally determined. However, determinists would claim that this ‘feeling’ of freedom is not sufficient evidence to say that we are free since it is possible for us to feel free even when we are not. For example, if I had a brain tumour that I didn’t know of which caused me to drink repeatedly then I am unaware that the tumour is making me do so yet I feel as if I am freely choosing to drink. It may seem as though...
Words: 961 - Pages: 4
...Freedom is the ability to do what a person desires and is capable of. For centuries philosophers have questioned if humans really have free will or not. There are two bodies of thought on the subject. Determinists insist that choices are irrelevant to reality because there is a fated design for everyone. Libertarianists allege that humans make choices and guide themselves through a decision making process and are in absolute control of their futures. The thesis of determinism seems to contradict ordinary experiences, whereas the theory of libertarianism disregards event-causation. Philosopher Walter T. Stace proposed an alternative compatibilist philosophy. In order to recognize the ways in which Stace effectively amalgamates the two thesis' utilizing his compatibilist approach, an objective examination of the three ideas is compulsory. The following article will define the support and contradictions of hard determinism and libertarianism, as well as clarify the ways in which compatibilist is a practical alternative. Hard determinists believe that genetics determine personalities and actions only through the Newtonian laws of cause and effect. They affirm that freedom and free will are fiction and because of this humans have no moral responsibility for their actions. They insist that the sources of motivation behind their thoughts and actions are causualistic and predictable and that free will is an illusion triggered by convenience and ego. The past determines the future. Determinism...
Words: 667 - Pages: 3
...FREE WILL OR DETERMINISM 1 Free Will or Determinism Ashley Magee American InterContinental University FREE WILL OR DETERMINISM 2 Abstract This essay will discuss free will versus determinism. This will be a dialogue between an imaginary Socrates and me. A series of questions will be discussed to describe determinism and free will. FREE WILL OR DETERMINISM 3 Socrates: What is your definition of determinism? Ashley: Determinism is the thought that each event is caused by something. Since human actions could be looked at as an event then each choice is because of a cause. Socrates: So, if every event is based on a cause then we do not have free will. Ashley: I don’t believe human action is an event, I feel like we all make our own decisions and our fate is determined by our decisions. Socrates: What is your definition of free will? Ashley: Free will is to act without the confinement of fate. This is acting at one’s own concern. Socrates: Is it not true that we all have our own fate? Ashley: I believe that our fate lies in our own hands. It is up to us to decide how we live our lives. Socrates: Do you feel that every event has an explanatory cause? Ashley: I do not feel that way. Some things just can’t be explained and we will never know why some things happen. Socrates: Is it not true that everything happens for a reason? Ashley: I think that everything happens because of the decision that we made. Whether good or bad things happen...
Words: 1003 - Pages: 5
... The Truth behind Free Will: Luther vs. Erasmus The notion of free will is one of the most complex notions to define and to understand; it is defined differently according to one’s interpretation of the scriptures, especially the Bible. Both Martin Luther and Desiderius Erasmus, influenced by their faith and beliefs, write respectively against and for free will. Both try to adequately answer the questions: Does man have free will? If yes, why and how? If not, how? Possible answers to these questions given by both authors and some scholars who write against or for each one of these opponents’ arguments highlight, especially, the differences in the conception of man’s free will. Luther and his supporters view free will as an imaginary or impossible and dangerous thing to have; Erasmus and his supporters defend that the existence of man’s free will is irrefutable for it is in human nature itself as the Bible says it. In spite of some of Luther’s good ideas that prove man’s absence of free will and Erasmus’ excellent interpretation of the Bible, neither of them fully responds to the human yearning of knowing the concept of free will. After a thorough and wise analysis of the defense and abnegation of man’s free will of these authors, I find it impossible to fully deny or prove the existence of man’s free will. It is important to take into account Luther’s argument and Erasmus’ before making a decision about the concept of free will. First of all, we...
Words: 3561 - Pages: 15
...Determinism vs Free Will “Determinism is the thesis that everything that occurs happens of necessity.” (Palmer, pg 220). The question of free will is one which has been hotly debated for millennia. Some people believe that humans have the capacity for free will - the ability to choose their actions without being forced to follow a certain course by either by the influence of others or by natural laws. For many theists, free will is regarded as a special gift from God. The notion of human free will is also an important premise for a lot of what happens in human society, in particular, when it comes to our legal system. Professor Embree stated in class free will is necessary for the notion of personal responsibility (Embree, 10/14/14). If people do not have free will, then it is difficult to argue that they are personally and morally responsible for their actions - and if that is the case, how can they be punished for their misdeeds? Free will and determinism are two major theories that have been argued throughout time in order to explain the way individuals’ lives are projected and set up throughout their lifetime. Others, however, argue that if the universe itself is deterministic in nature, then human actions must also be deterministic, thus, modern determinism tends to be an outgrowth of modern science. If human actions simply follow the course of natural law, then it is difficult to hold that those actions can be "freely" chosen. Those who advocate determinism run into...
Words: 498 - Pages: 2
...Free Will vs. Determinism Socrates: “What is the definition of determinism?” Maria: “It, the theory or doctrine that acts of will and occurrences in nature or social or psychological phenomena are usually caused by preceding events or natural laws? Socrates: “What is the definition of free will?” Maria: “Free will is a voluntary choice or decision, freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or divine intervention, humanity has the freedom of choice, since our choices are ours in the first place, although they must have an explanation.” Socrates: “Do you agree that every event has an explanatory cause?” Maria: “Yes I would like to think that some situations do not hold warrant explanations, every event does have an explanatory cause, and how do we explain the events and how they come about they just don’t happen by chance” Socrates: “How do we define events?” Maria: “Events are things that happen such as natural disasters, births death and weddings” Socrates: “How do you define explanatory cause?” Maria: “If what you’re asking determines whether or not there is an explanation for why something happened that led to a specific effect it is an event like when you have a baby and then a shower for the baby.” Socrates: “Would you agree that every choice or event would have an explanatory cause?” Maria: “Yes, I would like to believe that sometimes some choices or events are random leading to free will.” Socrates: “How...
Words: 568 - Pages: 3
...Philosophy Free Will vs. Determinism Socrates: “What is the definition of determinism?” Maria: “It, the theory or doctrine that acts of will and occurrences in nature or social or psychological phenomena are usually caused by preceding events or natural laws? Socrates: “What is the definition of free will?” Maria: “Free will is a voluntary choice or decision, freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or divine intervention, humanity has the freedom of choice, since our choices are ours in the first place, although they must have an explanation.” Socrates: “Do you agree that every event has an explanatory cause?” Maria: “Yes I would like to think that some situations do not hold warrant explanations, every event does have an explanatory cause, and how do we explain the events and how they come about they just don’t happen by chance” Socrates: “How do we define events?” Maria: “Events are things that happen such as natural disasters, births death and weddings” Socrates: “How do you define explanatory cause?” Maria: “If what you’re asking determines whether or not there is an explanation for why something happened that led to a specific effect it is an event like when you have a baby and then a shower for the baby.” Socrates: “Would you agree that every choice or event would have an explanatory cause?” Maria: “Yes, I would like to believe that sometimes some choices or events are random leading to free will.” Socrates:...
Words: 578 - Pages: 3
...that everything that happens to us is the result of something beyond our control. Everything we do is laid out befor we do it. Socrates: What is the definition of free will? me: The ability of a person to choose from different options. We consciously and intentionally perfom every action that we do and have every choice to alter our futures however we want it. Socrates: Do you agree that every event has an explanatory cause? me: Sometimes Socrates: How do you define event? me: Things that happen. Socrates: Are things that happen free will? me: sometimes Socrates: How do you define explanatory cause? me: That there is a cause for all events. Socrates: Do you believe that all events have causes? me: Yes. Socrates: Do you agree that every human choice or event has an explanatory cause? me: No. Socrates: How do you define human choice? How do you definite human event? Are they different? me: A human choice is when a person has options and chooses one of them. A human event is a something that happens in a human’s life. Yes. Socrates: Do you agree that to have an explanatory cause is to not be free? me: No. Socrates: How do you define free? me: Having the freedom to make choices in one’s life. Socrates: Do you think that free will and determinism can coexist in any way? me: Yes. Socrates: me: Socrates: Is it possible to have external determinism and internal free...
Words: 258 - Pages: 2
...argument is an appeal to intuitive everyday examples where even regular humans appear to have middle knowledge about what free agents would do in different circumstances. Plantinga's example is that of Curley Smith, a corrupt mayor who accepts a bribe of $35,000. Plantinga asserts that, quite obviously, we can know that if Smith had instead been offered $36,000 he would have accepted the greater offer. According to Adams, this proposition is a “semi-factual” in which the antecedent is false (the offer was in fact $35,000), but the consequent is assumed to be true. The proposition's truth comes from the fact that the consequent, Smith's acceptance of the offer, would not have been “prevented or...
Words: 1387 - Pages: 6
