Theme Of Free Will In Notes From Underground By Fyodor Dostoevsky

In “Human Freedom and the Self,” Roderick M. Chisholm takes the libertarian stance, arguing that freedom is incompatible with determinism, that determinism is in fact false, and that humans do posses the kind of freedom required for moral responsibility. Chisholm argues that a deterministic universe, where all events, including human actions, proceed from prior events without the possibility that they would proceed differently than they do prevent the possibility that humans are responsible for their actions. To validate his libertarian beliefs, Chisholm sets out to prove that humans are responsible for their actions and also the thoughts that lead to those actions. In order to answer this problem, Chisholm believes we must make some assumptions about the man who preforms the act.

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

People believe that genuine freedom of choice is not always possible because our decisions and actions are determined by factors beyond our control. This view is known as Determinism. There is also an extreme form of determinism known as ‘hard determinism,’ in which they believe that every demeanor can be traced to a cause, although they may disagree about what those causes are. The idea of determinism poses a difficult issue to the concept of ‘free will’. Are we able to make free choices if all our thoughts and actions are predetermined by our own past and the physical laws of nature? Majority of us would like to believe that we have the freedom of will and are able to make decisions based on our own discretion but, I personally believe that the deterministic view holds true to a certain extent and that most of our actions are a result of a force that is beyond our comprehension. My purpose in this essay is to explain and critically analyze Baron d’Holbach’s view on determinism.

Many times I find myself sitting and wondering whether I am fully free or not. I wake up every single morning and do the same routine, which is eat breakfast, go to class or work, do homework, go to the gym, shower, and then go to bed. Does this truly mean I am free? There are a lot of questions that you can ask yourself while following a routine. Is this really the path I should have taken? Were my choices determined by external factors? Determinism is the thesis that an any instant there is only one physically possible future. Robert Blatchford and Walter Terence Stace, two philosophers, both agree that determinism is true, although they have two different views on whether this means that people are free or not. Blatchford believes that everything is predestined. Stace on the other hand, believes that a person chooses what they do because of free will. In this essay I am going to discuss both of the philosophers’ views more in depth and why I favor Stace’s view over Blatchford’s.

The aim of this essay is to prove the reliability of and why Libertarianism is the most coherent of the three Free Will and Determinism views. It refers to the idea of human free will being true, that one is not determined, and therefore, they are morally responsible. In response to the quote on the essay, I am disagreeing with Wolf. This essay will be further strengthened with the help of such authors as C.A. Campell, R. Taylor and R.M. Chisholm. They present similar arguments, which essentially demonstrate that one could have done otherwise and one is the sole author of the volition. I will present the three most common arguments in support of Libertarianism, present an objection against Libertarianism and attempt to rebut it as well as

Free will is an important feature of modern person’s life. It is “a philosophical term of art for a particular sort of capacity of rational agents to choose a course of action from among various alternatives” (“Free Will”). In other words, free will allows person to make a choice regardless of specific surrounding circumstances. Different systems of philosophy have controversial attitude to this term. Depending on affiliation with certain school, experts admit or reject the thought of existence of a free will. But, regardless of philosophical judgments, people often admit an importance of the possibility to make independent decisions and administer own life. Free will gives person an opportunity to decide in favor of long-term, more global purposes; and this choice can expose immediate perspectives to a risk. This particular situation was described by Sarah Orne Jewett in her short story A White Heron. A possibility of free will sometimes became a vital feature; Kate Chopin showed a literal reflection of this statement in her story The Story of an Hour. The author demonstrated what catastrophic consequences can cause an unexpected loss of desired free will.

In the following paper I will talk about A.J. Ayer’s “Freedom and Necessity,” and I will explain the dilemma of determinism and Ayer’s compatibilist solution to it. I will explain some of the examples Ayer uses to explain the difference between cause and being constrained, and how both affect one’s free will. I will also discuss on why Ayer’s compatibilism solution to the dilemma is the best solution so far.

The lights are on but nobody’s home. My elevator doesn’t go to the top. I’m not playing with a full deck. I’ve lost my marbles. ….cause I am cra-a-zy! Just like yooou! -Barenaked Ladies

Free will and individualism are rights that have been used as symbols of peace and progressive, but they also have been viewed as weakness and a liability. Although free will and individualism should be viewed as good, there are times in history when they were considered a problem. These times are addressed in George Orwell’s 1984 and Toni Morrison’s Beloved. Both novels choose to outline the lost of free will and individualism through the lens of an oppressed group, and while the oppression that each group have their differences, both express how free will and individualism is suppressed and how people lived under oppression without their rights.

The underground man refers to a group of ‘you gentlemen’ throughout Notes from Underground. These ‘gentlemen’ represent that of the philosopher Nikolay Chernyshevsky and his followers. Chernyshevsky believes in the ideology of the rational egoist which Dostoevsky’s underground man opposes in the text. The rational egoist is a self-interested being where striving for their own pleasure is one’s priority in life. Rational egoism is made up of a descriptive claim where one is determined to act on one’s self-interests because it is believed to be engrained in our biology. As well as a normative claim where one should take care to overcome hinderances in the way of achieving their perceived self-interests. Chernyshevsky believes that rational egoism will create harmony and balance amongst people in society as their rational interests will sync up with one another. The rational ego is one that is predictable. Dostoevsky describes ‘a little table’, which the rational egoist believes in. Rational egoism follows the laws of nature that remain the same and constant.

In Notes from the Underground the man has been secluded for twenty years but the stories he tell are from many years before. That makes one infer when he is speaking about being underground he is talking figuratively. The underground man is self-contained. He says when he sees or hears others speak it is as “listening through a crack under the floor.” When he communicates to others, he pictures himself approaching "out into the light of day. “ When he hesitates between wanting associates and favoring his seclusion, it is a choice between the actual world and his imaginary world underground. The underground man seems to speak of being better and more intelligent than most, but yet seem to be below others if he prefers to be under the ground.

Underground Man is plagued by the proponents of a society which thrives on reason and rationality. The idea that behind every question and thought there lies a calculated and precise answer that is highly valued in the face of society. The societal expectation of being extraordinarily rational is referred to as the “Palace of Crystal” by Underground Man, here there is no room for the five senses only room for contemplation. Though this level of breadth and rationality correlates with an excess in consciousness, as one always has to think about things at a level which is unimaginable to most. The latter leading to not only indecision, but also self doubt, and over analyzation of normally simple situations. As a side effect of the enlightened mindset of society, Underground Man develops an excess consciousness in which his pride directly leads to his break with Liza and the consequences that stem from that break.

In this essay I will explain why I think the strongest position of the free will debate is that of the hard determinists and clarify the objection that moral responsibility goes out the door if we don’t have free will by addressing the two big misconceptions that are associated with determinists: first that determinism is an ethical system, and secondly that contrary to common belief determinists do believe in the concept of cause and effect. I will also begin by explaining my position and why I believe that the position of the indeterminist does not hold water as an argument and the third

An individual with “Free Will” is capable of making vital decisions and choices in life with own free consent. The individual chooses these decisions without any outside influence from a set of “alternative possibilities.” The idea of “free will” imposes a certain kind of power on an individual to make decisions of which he or she is morally responsible. This implies that “free will” would include a range of aspects such as originality, moral value, and self-governance. However, in life, individuals may not be free in making decisions. The aspect of freedom could entail remarkably a high status action and achievement in an individual’s life whose attainment could be close to impossibility. Often, people make

The overall emphasis of this work is on humans and human free will. Pico demonstrates the importance of free will. It is because of free will, according to him, that humans can choose their