The Controversy Over Free Will And Determinism

Determinism is a doctrine suggesting that for every event there exist conditions that could cause no alternative event. Free will is a philosophical term describing a particular sort of capacity of rational agents to choose a course of action from among various alternatives. Understandably, the dichotomy between these two concepts is a topic philosophers have debated over for many years. As a result of these debates, a number of alternative philosophical perspectives arguing for the existence of free will, namely libertarianism and compatibilism, have emerged, existing in stark contrast to determinism. In order to ascertain the extent to which free will is compatible with determinism, one must first consider these different approaches to

Free will and determinism are two distinct philosophies regarding human character that some philosophers believe to be compatible, while other philosophers do not. Determinism suggests that every action and decision is predictable and foreseeable while free will affords these decisions as random acts and selectable by our will and desire to choose to decide which path to take. In this paper, I will argue that free will is not compatible with 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.

The question of our freedom is one that many people take for granted. However, if we consider it more closely it can be questioned. The thesis of determinism is the view that every event or happening has a cause, and that causes guarantee their effects. Therefore given a cause, the event must occur and couldn’t occur in any other way than it did. Whereas, the thesis of freewill is the view that as human beings, regardless of a cause, we could have acted or willed to act differently than we did. Determinism therefore, states that the future is something that is fixed and events can only occur in one way, while freewill leaves the future open. Obviously a huge problem arises between these two theses. They cannot both be true

Many believe that the world is largely determined but we can still act freely as our behaviour is not predictable. Thomas Aquinas disagreed with hard determinism as he believed that ‘man chooses freely, not out of necessity’. Although Aquinas and others that criticise hard determinism and disagree with the hard determinist views, would still agree with hard determinists in that free will and determinism are incompatible, but would argue that we have free will but our lives are not determined. This view that free will and determinism are incompatible but it is free will that exists, not determinism, is also supported by libertarians.

I am going to give four agruments on why, in my opinion free will exists. The first argument has to deal with determinism. If we are fully determined in what we think, believe and do, then of course the belief that determinism is true is also a result of this determinism. But the same is true for the belief that determinism is false. There is nothing you can do about whatever you believe—you had to believe it. There is no way to take an independent stance and consider the arguments unprejudiced because all various forces making us assimilate the evidence in the world just the way we do. One either turns out to be a determinist or not and in neither case can we appraise the issue because we are pre-determined to have a view on that matter one way or another.

Philosophers through history, especially those of late have debated over the matter of free will. The argument of humans being free is contradicted by a notion of a pre-determined fate, one that helps to conceive the notion of an omnipotent god. The three major groups of thought on this issue determinists, libertarians and compatibilists all have varying views of free will, while compatibilism is a combination of beliefs of the other two groups. A compatibilist would reject any notion that physical determinism impedes free will, as an event may be determined but done voluntarily.

Determinism and free-will can not be associated with each other, because determinism is the belief that everything happens for a reason and free-will is the idea that you have control over actions without influece or persuasions of any sort. If determinism is true, your past has influence over the decisions that you make in the present and future, therefore, determinism and free-will are not compatible.

Free does not mean caused, in any aspect. The problem of free will and compatibilism is that will is determined by prior events in the casual chain, which causes and determines the actions of those involved. It has been suggested that chance and random occurrences is an explanation for freedom, however if something was truly random then it would break the casual chain. It could then be argued that because of chance outcomes from an individuals action that they could not be morally responsible. It is common for philosophers to counter this argument by stating that chance is an illusion, Albert Einstein once stated “God does not play dice” implying that everything has a cause even if we have not figured it out

Chapter 3 refers to “Free Will” as having the power to make choices and engage in actions that originate with ourselves. Free will means that each individual has the freedom to make moral choices, engage in moral behavior, display moral actions, and act ethically. Determinism states that every event has a cause. Unlike free will, determinism suggest that every action, thought, and feeling is caused by an event. Basically, nothing happened that is not caused to happen. Interdeterminism suggest that internal factors both biological and psychological influence choice making and behavior.

We are raised to believe that we are the makers of our own destiny. Every decision we make is our own, and we are free citizens in every sense of the word.

Determinism for many years have been defined as a theory of all the events, we need to include moral choices as well, are determined by some sort of causes. It’s a belief of predestination. If we suppose this, then all the events or all the decisions that we are make in the future are inevitable and cannot be reversed by any type of circumstances. It is usually to understood to be the antithesis of Free will. According to these statements determinism really means that everything is predictable and that includes the process of making decisions. We can assume that a series of pre-conditions define our outcomes in life. In the other hand, Free will is closely connected to moral of the human. Most philosophers think that all humans are author

     Before one can properly evaluate the entire debate that enshrouds the Free Will/Determinism, each term must have a meaning, but before we explore the meaning of each term, we must give a general definition. Determinism is, "Everything that happens is caused to happen. (Clifford Williams. "Free Will and Determinism: A Dialogue" pg 3). This is the position that Daniel, a character in Williams’ dialogue, chooses to believe and defend. David Hume goes a little deeper and explains in his essay, "An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding of Liberty and Necessity," that determinism is this: "It is universally allowed, that matter, in all its operations, is actuated by a necessary force, and

Now when free will is presented in a discussion, there are many terms involved that have indefinite meanings. In this following essay, free will be defined as being “morally responsible for one's own actions” while God will be defined as “that than which nothing greater can be thought.” Determinism can be defined as the concept of every event or action being a consequence of a higher beings state of affairs and freedom can be defined as the ability to choose our own actions without restraint. The idea that will be argued is primarily in support of compatibilist views, which are people who believe there is a way that the existence of a deity can harmonize with the human free will. In another viewpoint, incompatibilist are people who believe

Free will by definition is a theological and philosophical idea referring to the ability of man to choose an action at his own accord and motive. He is also responsible for the consequences and repercussions of those actions. Many Philosophers believe that these observations are true, but, other philosophers think otherwise; although men seem free to do as they please it's a mirage. The Philosophers that deem this “free will” is false conclude that a man’s sense of freedom is influenced by a higher power or the laws of