Determinism Vs Libertarianism

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

Libertarians support the view that people have free will and so we are free to make moral decisions. For a Libertarian, the key evidence for this is the act of decision making in our daily lives. Hume states that “experience is what we see to be true”, each human being experiences the feeling of being free to make a decision. If experiencing any other action constitutes it to be true, then why not the same for free will? Libertarians argue that we have awareness of the choices we make; we can choose to do anything that we are capable of. Though we are influenced by our environment and experiences, ultimately we can make our own decisions, nothing is

When I wake up in the morning, I have a set list of obligations for that day. Reasoning and habit dictate that I will follow through that set list, yet I am my own being and have control over my actions. I have free will and can choose to sleep in bed all day or get up and do my chores. While there are some situations where the consequences are out of our control, we still have the ability to decide when opportunities arise. Either extreme of this argument has its fatal flaws, as the determinist see everything as the product of a choice made long ago, and the libertarianist claims we have free will no matter how dire the situation is. Compatibilism makes the most sense to me, it is the difference between the two in an argument without a solution.

Hard determinism and libertarianism are both extreme philosophies with soft determinism (compatibilism) somewhat of a middle ground. Hard determinism sees very little or no free will for actions, that everything is inevitable. Libertarianism views that every person has free will in their decisions. Soft determinism states that there is a determined plan of action, but that there is a freedom dependent upon whether that determined action comes from an internal decision. Decisions are therefore resulting actions come from either external or internal motivations. Based upon the readings and personal experiences, I would have to say I am a soft-determinist.

Libertarianism rejects soft determinism and hard determinism because libertarians believe that freedom does exist. However, libertarians believe in indeterminism because it does not believe in any predetermined causality. Also, “libertarians say that you also have to be free to want differently than you do.” (pp. 227-233, Palmer)

Freedom is the ability to do what a person desires and is capable of. For centuries philosophers have questioned if humans really have free will or not. There are two bodies of thought on the subject. Determinists insist that choices are irrelevant to reality because there is a fated design for everyone. Libertarianists allege that humans make choices and guide themselves through a decision making process and are in absolute control of their futures. The thesis of determinism seems to contradict ordinary experiences, whereas the theory of libertarianism disregards event-causation. Philosopher Walter T. Stace proposed an alternative compatibilist philosophy. In order to recognize the ways in which Stace effectively amalgamates the two thesis' utilizing his campatibilist approach, an objective examination of the three ideas is compulsory. The following article will define the support and contradictions of hard determinism and libertarianism, as well as clarify the ways in which compatibilism is a practical alternative.

Hard Determinism and Libertarianism are not the only options we have to deal with the problem raised by determinism. As a matter of fact, there is Soft Determinism, which is, The belief that our actions can be free even though determinism is true. This option weighs in that Determinism is true. That our actions and the events that occur in our life are causally determined. For example, If you selected Chinese food rather than Pizza for dinner, you could n’t have chosen the other option given the exact circumstances and conditions again.

The idea of free will is something that has been debated for a very long time. Some believe that we have it, while some believe we don’t. Some believe that free will is an illusion and others believe that humans are responsible for what they do and as a result they have free will. In the scenario of choosing pizza over yogurt and then feeling guilty because I could’ve had yogurt instead I believe, that it would be reasonable for me to blame myself because I could have indeed chosen the yogurt over the pizza. In arguing this, I am taking the side of the libertarian who believes that we have free will.

Libertarian view on freedom is that choices are free from any persistence or pressure from human nature and free from any intentions by God. Libertarian is important to any moral responsibility. If choices were determined or created by anything, like for example someone’s desires, then it can’t be called a free choice. Libertarian is the freedom that acts on one’s nature, susceptibility, and considerable desires. The Libertarian viewer have an idea, that God make men act in a certain way, and the man has free will in acting in that way. God does put a limit on the actions that they can do, but not on their mind or their will. Some objections that come up is causality, responsibility, and God’s freedom.

I have a libertarianism view when it comes to whether or not humans have free will. I believe in the possibility of free will and I do not accept determinism. Free will is defined as the ability to make decisions at your own discretion. Determinism is defined as the events of the past, in conjunction with the laws of nature, necessitate every event in the future. What determinism means is that past events and the laws of nature are the factors that dictate what decision will be chosen. The libertarianism view accepts incompatibilism. Incompatibilism states that free will and determinism are incompatible and cannot work

The way according to Hume the he proposes we understand liberty is that we as humans can take one certain action or we can veer from that from that action and take a different course of action. An example of this might be that someone says they wants to ride a bicycle and because they choose this the person can enjoy in this liberty all they want, unless for some reason this person isn’t able to perform this action due to the fact that they are unable to because

To compare and contrast the concepts of determinism, compatibilism, and libertarianism, we must know what each is first before we can break them down to their cores and begin to an analyze each to see what is the basically the same and what is different. John Chaffee author of The Philosopher’s Way, A Text with Readings states that determinism is “The view that every event, including human actions, is brought about by previous events in accordance with universal causal laws that govern the world. Human freedom is an illusion” (Chaffee, 173). Chaffee’s definition of compatibilism is “The view that all events, including human actions, are caused. However, we can consider human actions free if they are the result of internal motivations, not

Determinism: According to Sappington (1990) there are two types of determinism, hard and soft. He states that those who hold hard determinism say that human behavior is completely determined by outside factors and that ideas such a free will or moral responsibility are meaningless. Many famous psychologists take this approach such as Freud who believed that people’s behavior is controlled by unconscious factors and any conscious reasons given are simply the brain rationalizing actions to the superego. Skinner argued against Freud and said that behavior is determined by their reinforcement histories. Although they argue on the finer points they both believe that conscious choice is irrelevant.

Ever since the beginning of time one of the biggest debates of time was Free Will or Determinism. With Determinism people are looking from the outside in, and with Free Will people are looking inside out. Is the world based on everyone and everything having Free Will, or is everything that happen determined to happen? I am a determinist, I believe that everything that happens, happens for a reason, caused by events that have happen in the past. I am going to give you three examples of historical events that show Determinism is present in society, and always has been present. Major court cases in the U.S. like Plessy v. Ferguson, Brown v. Board of Education, and Brown v. Board of Education 2 caused the Civil Rights Movement. WW2 Caused The Cold War. The great depression caused The New Deal, and FDR.

The determinists believe that people are molded by outside forces such as human nature, their environment, psychological forces, and social dynamics (Chaffee, 2013, p. 173). Human nature refers to the inborn nature that every person is genetically hardwired with. In other words we can’t have free choice because we cannot alter our fundamental character (Chaffee, 2013, p.173)