An Argument For Free Will. As An Outset, We Should First

The argument against free will states that; what you do is always determined by what you have the strongest desire to do, but you have no control over what you desire. If what you do is always determined by something that you have no control over then you can never actually act freely. It follows from what has been said that one does not have free will.

Determinism is the idea that everything we do as humans is determined by events prior to us being born and events that have happened in the past. Decisions that you may think are based on your desires, are actually based of things beyond your control. But the big question is, if determinism is

If we accept the determinist argument and assume human behavior as a consequence of external factors rather than of free choice, then we must realize that our explanation of human behavior leaves no room for morality. If people do not choose their actions, then they are not really responsible for them, and there is no need for praising or blaming them. If determinism were true, then there would be no basis for human effort, for why should a person make an effort if what he or she does doesn't make a difference? If what will be will be, then one has an excuse for doing nothing. Life would not be so meaningful for people on deterministic grounds. Human life, as we know it, would not make much sense without the concept of freedom. In our everyday lives, there are many times when we have to make decisions; what we

The debate between free will and determinism is something that will always be relevant, for people will never fully admit that we have no free will. But, while we may feel that we control what we do in life, we simply do not. The argument for free will is that individuals have full control and responsibility over their actions, and what they become in life as a whole (The Impossibility of Moral Responsibility by Galen Strawson, page 16). Determinism, on the other hand, is saying that we have no control over our actions and that everything we do in life is determined by things beyond our control (Strawson, page 7). After analysis of The Impossibility of Moral Responsibility by Galen Strawson and Freedom and Necessity by A. J. Ayer,

Determinism supports the idea that our outcomes are based on our choices and that they are meant to happen that way. An example of one’s deterministic view is Brent Staples describing the ways he unintentionally frightened those around him in public and he would go out of his way to make them feel safer. It’s unfair that an accomplished college graduate should be judged for their appearance, as well as anyone else for that matter. Staples had no obligation to act the way he did, but in order to keep himself safe, he could not pose a threat and get away with it as a black

Determinism says that past events and laws of nature determine every fact of the future, meaning if evil exists, then God there’s the possibility God does not have the power to control evil. If this is true, then God can still exist as an all knowing, all powerful, all good being because he can do nothing to change the determined path of the universe, meaning evil can be viewed as a separate power that can’t control its own path, it just exists. I believe that free will and determinism can exist in the universe simultaneously (compatibilism), so the evils that humans create are of voluntary choice because that was what determinism planned for that person. The reasoning behind my belief that determinism and free will can exist in the same realm is I side with the voluntary choice option of free will. Voluntary choice states that you act freely if and only if you act voluntarily, without coercion or constraint. This allows determinism to coincide with voluntary choice; if the laws of nature fully determine every fact of the future, then the choices we make are choices we freely made. God knew that humans would be able to create evil because he gave us free will, but he can’t do anything about it because of determinism and the laws of nature, suggesting that humankind wouldn’t “exist” if evil didn’t exist,

Determinism (as defined by Webster) is “A doctrine that acts of the will, natural events, or social changes are determined by preceding events or natural causes”. Likely, the most radical definition of determinism would state that all events in the world are the result of a previous event, or a combination of previous events. Within the realm of the all encompassing radical determinism there are philosophies that are somewhat better thought out or backed by science. One example of this is Genetic Determinism. We know that people are in some way determined by their genes both physically and behaviorally, as the human DNA is applied. Two categories of genetic determinism are Genetic Fixity and Innate Capacity.

The discussion of free will and its compatibility with determinism comes down to one’s conception of actions. Most philosophers and physicists would agree that events have specific causes, especially events in nature. The question becomes more controversial when philosophers discuss the interaction between human beings, or agents, and the world. If one holds the belief that all actions and events are caused by prior events, it would seem as though he would be accepting determinism. For if an event has a particular cause, the event which follows must be predetermined, even if this cause relates to a decision by a human being. Agent causation becomes important for many philosophers who, like me, refuse to

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

Determinism supporters claim that all consequences are inevitable since conditions are met and nothing else would occur by any chances. And determinism could influence and controlling everything in the universe with causal laws. According to determinism, we could make predictions about the occurrences of certain events or actions of human beings. There three types of determinism that I will discuss in the following, the Hard determinism, Soft determinism and Libertarianism.

The first matter to be noted is that this view is in no way in contradiction to science. Free will is a natural phenomenon, something that emerged in nature with the emergence of human beings, with their

Determinism means the past determines the future, leaving only one way out. An article from Micheal McKenna stated, “according to this characterization, if determinism is true, then, given the actual past, and holding fixed the laws of nature, only one future is possible at any moment in time.” The argument form experience says when a decision is made it feels free, however this does not mean that they are free. Within determinism, just as in free will, the question of morality and ethics arises. If everything a person does is predetermined, then moral agents and ethics would serve no point (Rachels 118).

One of the strengths of the determinist viewpoint is that it is hard to argue against. There are definite patterns and connections throughout the physical universe and the biological realm. There is no denying that fact. Just look at modern chemistry or how everything is made up of waves. Also, you can’t prove that you ever had more than one choice since there can only ever be one choice. In other words, once the moment is gone it is impossible to say that things could have been different since there is no going back. It is also hard to deny that some of our actions are a result of certain causes. You can always argue that something in your past affected your choices in the present.

     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

Some people think this conflicts with the basic ideology of free will because if determinism is true then everything has a cause and what happens is not a product of our own choices, i.e. our free will. Because causal relationships mean everything when discussing freedom, we will look at the main facets of determinism and how those intersect with free will.