ARGUMENTS AGAINST DETERMINISM: MAN IS FREE, NO MORE, NO LESS
INTRODUCTION
The issues of Freedom and Determinism have been sensitive issues that have sparked off heated debates throughout history. The question whether man is really free has been a hard nut to crack and as a result of this, many attempts have been made by different individuals from both philosophical and theological point of view in their effort to explain and understand this concept ‘Freedom’. The line of thought that supports the notion of free will is also called libertarianism.
DEFINITION OF CONCEPTS
Before delving into the argument, it is worthy of note that the terms under discussion be given a definition for a better understanding of the terms. According to Advanced Learners’ Dictionary, determinism is the belief that people are not free to choose what they are like or how they behave because these things are decided by their background, surroundings and other things over which they have no control. It is simply the view that man is not free, that his actions are determined by certain causes. On another note, libertarianism according to the same source is the belief that people should have the freedom to do and think as they like. Freedom is simply man’s capacity to take hand in his own development.
Concentrating more on the major object of my argument which is against determinism, the concept freedom was supported by both philosophers and theologians throughout history. On the part of the philosophers, they analyzed freedom in two different concepts. In their analysis they came to the conclusion that there is ‘freedom from’ as in freedom from external oppression and compulsion and the other being ‘freedom for’ which is the internal freedom of man for his/her self-realization. From the theological point of view, “freedom is the power rooted in reason and will, to act or not to act, to do this or that and so to perform deliberate actions on one’s own responsibility” (CCD 1731). The different views of the philosophers and theologians will be seen the line of this argument.
But this pertinent question still lingers on, “Is man really free?” “Does he really has a free will?” or “Is his actions determined?”. It is a common belief that man is free, that he makes use of his freedom the way he likes and is therefore responsible for whatever he does. The theory of determinism denies man this freedom. It is based on this that I argue against the notion of Determinism.
ARGUMENTS AGAINST DETERMINISM
First and foremost, the best and most convincing of proof of man’s freedom is comes from man’s moral experience. This shows that responsibility is a sine qua non in the treatment of man’s freedom. To be free is definitely to be responsible because there can be no freedom without responsibility. This rightly indicates that man is held responsible for the way he exercises his freedom. In the same vein, Thomas Aquinas, a great theologian of his time made us understand that to argue in favour of determinism is go contrary to the law of moral philosophy. This is true because according to him, certain principles of moral philosophy like deliberation, exhortation, command, praise or blame will be destroyed. If we believe that man is not free then there will be no need for moral or legal systems.
More so, “freedom is the birthright of man”. According to the German philosopher, Immanuel Kant, “It is the alone unoriginated birthright of man and this right belongs to him by the force of his humanity”. Despite the squabbles and oppression depicted in this world, one thing is certain, the conscience of man cannot be silenced in seeking that which is undeniably his birthright. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights’ Acts of 1948 made this clearer that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and right.
In addendum, “freedom is the essence of man”. Origen made this point clearer in his book, ‘De Principiis’ where he wrote a treatise on freedom. He made us understand that “free will constitutes the essence itself of rational creatures by which none of them can be constrained to act by force”. This simply means that to act by constraint is to remove man from his nature. This affirms the obvious truth the man by nature is free and that freedom is the very nature of as a rational being and to lose one’s rationality is to lose one’s freedom.
Furthermore, “freedom is the greatest perfection of man” as stated by Rene Descartes. For him, the sum perfection of man is of acting by way of will which means acting freely. This freedom of man can be seen as the first and completely common notions that are innate in mankind and man being man exercises this gift of perfection the way he chooses.
More so, Immanuel Kant considers freedom as “the property of the will to give to itself a law”. For him, even if the greater part of the power of reason crumbles, the power of freedom does not weaken because it recovers from man everything that was lost on the speculative terrain. This is because man is not subordinate to the law of necessity as other phenomena are. Why is this so? Freedom is the faculty which man has of being the master and author of his own actions.
Without freedom, man cannot be himself. What do I mean by this? Nature has made man in such a way as to be the master of his own becoming. This is because in trying to be himself, man acquires and develops a conscience in order to define the program of his life well for whose realization the gift of freedom is intended. And this is in line with what Arch Bishop Fulton Sheen said that freedom is the capacity to do what one ought to do. We should always have at the back of our minds that nature is not an enemy of man but its handmaid, and as a result, the freedom of man cannot be turned against nature.
Most of the times, we fail to understand this issue of determinism. For one to argue in favour of determinism simply means reducing oneself not just man to a robot or machine that can be controlled with a remote and predicted at any time. When we speak of man, it seems we are referring to something abstract without knowing that we are speaking of ourselves too. This means that we are degrading our existence to that of other animals which should not be.
One of the contemporary philosophers and also an existentialist by name Jean Paul Sartre made us understand that determinism is an illusion. This is because human freedom is an integral part of human existence and to deny the reality of human freedom is to deny the reality of human existence. For Sartre, when one speaks in favour of determinism, one wants to avoid or escape responsibility for his actions. Sartre calls this ‘self deception’ or ‘bad faith’. He has said it all in his assertion, “man is condemned to be free” because freedom cannot be separated from the nature of man. Moreover, despite the fact that man is free, he is not absolutely free. I know that this statement will raise a tingling ear and seem as if am supporting the fact that freedom and determinism are compatible? Hold your breath and do not jump to conclusions yet. Going back to the analysis of the philosophers that we have external and internal freedom, there is unlimitedness in the internal freedom of man than in the external freedom. This is because man cannot be absolutely free with regards to economic, social, political and religious entanglements. But bear you in mind that this was not the way nature made it to be from the beginning and as a result of this deprivation, man still continues to struggle and fight for this his birthright and he will not rest until it is achieved. By the way, which do you consider true freedom, external or internal freedom? You may say that I am shifting my focus elsewhere? It is not so because my question still contains the concept under discussion. The libertarian philosophers believe strongly that “a free man is one who is free internally” and I stand with them in this regard.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the issue of freedom has been a hard nut to crack from the earliest times but this is not something we should be treating in abstractness because we are speaking of ourselves. Well, if you are still in doubt of the existence of freedom, let me throw this question to you; why are laws made when all men’s action are the fulfillment of an eternal plan? Why do we praise or blame people for their actions? In fact, it is because of freedom that positivity and ethical values are prevalent in the society. Anyway, I may not know one’s opinion for arguing in favour of determinism if not for the fact that one is free to air one’s views. To cut the long story short, my advice for you is in line with what James William, an American Philosopher says,“My first act of free will is to believe in free will”. More so, Jean-Paul Sartre in his discussion on existentialism and Humanism made us understand that “we are free, we are freedom and as earlier said, man is condemned to be free”. For him, the only sense in which we are not free is that “we are not free to be free”. Also, in sartre’s Being and Nothingness where he drew a distinction between power and freedom, he made it clear that there is no situation in which we do not have a choice no matter how unpleasant. Also, for you to speak in favour of determinism is an indication that you are supporting the fact that human effort has no meaning since whatever man does has already been determined.
With the above arguments, I believe that I have convinced you that freedom exists and it is in man’s nature to be free. Since it is this way, freedom cannot give way to determinism as the hard determinists stipulated or be compatible with determinism like the soft determinists propounded. As a result, there is no need over labouring the obvious. Man is free, no more, no less.