Compatibilism Vs Determinism

There are those who think that our behavior is a result of free choice, but there are also others who believe we are servants of cosmic destiny, and that behavior is nothing but a reflex of heredity and environment. The position of determinism is that every event is the necessary outcome of a cause or set of causes, and everything is a consequence of external forces, and such forces produce all that happens. Therefore, according to this statement, man is not free.

According to Sartre, the individual is isolated and disconnected from society, which creates a sense of

Before I begin it is pertinent to note the disparate positions on the problem of human freedom. In "Human Freedom and the Self", Roderick M. Chisholm takes the libertarian stance which is contiguous with the doctrine of incompatibility. Libertarians believe in free will and recognize that freedom and determinism are incompatible. The determinist also follow the doctrine of incompatibility, and according to Chisholm's formulation, their view is that every event involved in an act is caused by some other event. Since they adhere to this type of causality, they believe that all actions are consequential and that freedom of the will is illusory. Compatiblist deny the conflict between free will and determinism. A.J. Ayer makes a

When discussing the topic of compatibilism, several aspects of the concept must be considered, such as free will and determinism: those who are skeptical and criticize this philosophical position and or stance, are typically weary or concerned with the reality of both free will and determinism flowing freely together.

Jean Paul Sartre (1905-1980), experienced two world wars in his life which are credited with leading him to emphasise the importance and meaning of human freedom. He was very much a public figure, engaging with various politicians and making his works accessible to as many people as possible. Sartre believed that having the ability to make a free choice is part of being human as you have control over being in that situation and can always get out of it. “Every situation is one you choose because you could always get out of it”, strictly speaking this is only true when death is considered as a means to get out of a situation, but Sartre did believe that humans needed to face the notion of death in order to realise they have freedom. For Sartre there is no human nature, as we only become human once we start to exercise our free will by making choices and acting in the world.

Sartre refers to the responsibility our choices carry. Individuals in their aims of being free also make decisions that make them responsible of the consequences. For one to make a choice, he or she must bear the responsibility, and this is the heavy burden we carry to define our existence. Being free does not stand alone as it requires us to be responsible of each decision taken in life, because no one is going to look back for us. As a result, the fact that we are condemned to be free is affected by facticity in the sense that individuals make free choices regardless of right or wrong. For instance, what may be right for me, may be wrong for others and vice versa, and this is what make us authentic because we are our own judges upon every

There are many objections to Sartre’s ideas that we are completely free. The question of if our environment, our bodies, and what we are capable of is already determined then how are we completely free? What is freedom is there are already determined? Even though these things in our lives may already be determined, we are more than these things because we create who we are based off of what we make of ourselves. We find ourselves and who we are by experiences, which make us our own individual. Even though some things are already determined for us, we can do with them, as we like. We are free to make of ourselves whatever we would like,

Sartre proposes an interesting view on free will when he says, "either man is wholly determined or else man is wholly free." This quote shows us that Sartre believes that man is free to do what he wants. For Sartre, freedom is the most basic value, which renders possible all other values the way our fundamental plan precedes and grounds our small choices. In that sense freedom is the source of all values. It is not logically possible to make sense of human responsibility and notions of justice without a conception of free will. This is because it is free will that allows us as humans to choose and make the right decisions in life.

Sartre is someone who is an existentialist, who deals with human beings who exist by themselves and not with God. In this essay three questions along with the quote above. The following questions will be: why is there no human nature and the motives with that. Having freedom in what sense and if it is plausible. Lastly, what is bad faith and why is it bad? Sartre has a big view that God has nothing to do with humans and that there is no God.

He was free, free in every way, free to behave like a fool or a machine, free to accept, free to refuse, free to equivocate; to marry, to give up the game, to drag this death weight about with him for years to come. He could do what he liked, no one had the right to advise him, there would be for him no Good or Evil unless he thought them into being.” In this quotation Sartre explains the meaning of becoming absolutely free.

Sartre speaks of this freedom that we all humans have, he says that we are condemned to be free, we are meant to just do whatever we please. We sometimes think we are doing the right thing, if it’s well viewed and accepted by society. In some circumstances it doesn’t work that way people decide to do what they like even if is not accepted by society. People are free to do whatever they want, whether accepted by society or not and I strongly believe, that is, where the conflict begins. We are all free to do or think a certain way. How can society tell you whether is right or wrong? Is it just individuals trying to fit in, and do whatever society accepts or are they just doing what they really enjoy without needing to be accepted by others. I think that everyone is lying to themselves because how can you tell right or wrong apart if you don’t know either of. For example same sex marriage is accepted by some and rejected by others, and both groups believe that they are right and they can well justify why, they

As stated by Sartre, man has the choice to make all of their decisions freely, but are still “condemned” to be free, because we were thrust upon this earth without any choice and forced to exist. Since everyone was placed on this earth without our choosing, we still have to choose and act freely from any type of situation we may end up in. Because of that, every choice we make and the resulting circumstance that may come with it is the result of us being free and having those choices to make. The choice to have a choice is really the only thing we cannot choose. In his book, Sartre says, “Not only are we condemned to be free because we did not choose to exist, but we are also condemned to be free because we are the only thing that exists that

For Sartre this attitude is not the truth about oneself. Intentional conciousness means that we are more than what we are aware of about us. Although it is there in our life but sometime we can’t make out this truth as an individual so we cannot, in this sense, be defined as our "intentional objects" of consciousness, including our restrictions imposed on us by (facticity) our personal history, character, bodies, or objective responsibility. Thus, as Sartre often repeated,

One of Sartre’s major ideas is that the world is absurd and the human is a lonely individual in this world. He believed that our existence had no meaning. Because there is no meaning attached to human existence, it is up to the human to create meaning. Therefore, there is nothing to stand in the way of a person making whatever they want out of their life and becoming anything they want.

Having the topic of freedom concerns me a lot because it is certainly a tough thing to tackle and honestly in my 17 years of living I don’t really know if I’m capable of discussing such crucial concept in lined with my chosen philosopher. In contradiction with this, I want to challenge myself if I have this “philosopher capability” to oppose and fight the different concepts in the world regarding freedom specifically the notion of Rene Descartes.