Do We Have Free Will?

Or is each action pre-determined? These are interesting concepts that will bring us to the issues that will be discussed throughout this paper. Do we truly have free will on our actions or are they previously determined for us? Free will and Determinism offer us different views on how we can perceive the ultimate course of our actions and life.

As an outset, we should first get a clear understanding of what “free will” actually means. “A being has free will if given all other causal factors in the universe (genetic and environmental, physical and chemical…) it nevertheless possesses the ability to choose more than one thing” (Caplan, 1997) There are many different definitions of freedom, but the kind of freedom I want to address is one where an individual can do as he or she pleases even if bound by chains to the ground. This type of freedom is freedom of the mind from causal deterministic laws, the idea that every event is dictated by antecedent events and conditions together with the laws of nature. I think that the strongest argument for free will is

In the instance, the man kills himself due to reasons whose immediate impulses are internal but those impulses were formed due to some external causes. One such external cause might be that his daughter was kidnapped and the kidnapper called and said that if the man did not shoot himself by sun down today, then his daughter will be killed. But if the man kills himself by sun down, then his daughter will be safely returned to her mother. So in this case the man kills himself due to an internal impulse which is generated by an external cause. And in the instance where someone comes and shoots him, the cause is external as well. So in neither of these cases man is free. In the first instance when the man kills himself, he is bound by his love for his daughter and therefore does not really have a choice and in the second instance, he does not have any choice either. The conclusion is that choice does not really exist and even if it existed, it would not mean existence of free will. And complexity of the brain’s thought process when reconsidering a first impulse should not be confused with free will either.

Over the years, both philosophers and average people alike have contemplated the concept of free will. Usually, people would not contemplate free will. The common man usually just makes choices and does not wonder if this choice is truly a free one. Like many principles, the question of free will is not answered in consensus. This leads to the question “what are humans able to do?” Van Iwagen discusses free will in his essay The Powers of Rational Beings. He states that free will and determinism brings about a mystery.

Free Will is the capacity of acting without the pressures of fate and the ability to act because of one’s discretion. It is an idea that most believe in, because it means that you are in control

I want to argue that there is indeed free will. In order to defend the position that free will means that human beings can cause some of what they do on their own; in other words, what they do is not explainable solely by references to factors that have influenced them. My thesis then, is that human beings are able to cause their own actions and they are therefore responsible for what they do. In a basic sense we are all original actors capable of making moves in the world. We are initiators of our own behavior.

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

According to Frankfurt, “there is no more than an innocuous appearance of paradox in the proposition that it is determined, ineluctably and by forces beyond their control, that certain people have free wills and that others do not” (20). Frankfurt’s theory is purely based on the relationship between different orders of desires, instead of the origin of the desires. In other words, so long as one has the freedom to desire a particular first-order desire of his, he has the freedom of will, even though all of his desires are causally determined.

Free will is when you make choices yourself. Fate is when life has a certain plan and it works out without you making your own choices. In the play “Macbeth” he was a fierce warrior and had a lot of bravery. Macbeth had choices to make that would change his life forever. He killed a couple people and he was lying to all of his people. Macbeth was controlled by fate.

Freedom of the will is the choice between first order desires which creates a will. It is not limited by freedom of action, it is rather a question of whether it is a will we

A definition must be of it’s own parts, and so free will ought to be considered with “several distinct varieties of willings” (O’Connor). The components of free will can be reduced to one’s own philosophy: Thomas Aquinas asserts “our nature determines us to will certain general ends ordered to the most general goal of goodness,” meaning that

Free will is the freedom to chose. It is aiming to act in what you think is best for you. Free will includes man acting as their own agent and making the choices of whether or not to do

Mankind has pondered on the question of free will for many millennia. There are discussions of free will that pop up in religion, academia, politics, popular culture, and day to day life. To most, it might seem that humans have free will. Humans strive to be independent individuals, following precise schedules and strict regulations, always chasing after some dream of what they want from life. Humans more and more seem to be in control of everything happening on earth. However, a simple acceptance of the given reality is not enough. Our conception of free will ties into all aspects of human endeavor. If we are not the ones calling the shots then what is? What would change if we suddenly realized that we are not the ones choosing our actions, what would that entail for our societies, principles, and systems of morality? Who will hold the unaccountable accountable? Even if humans didn’t have free will would it be beneficial to still believe they did?

Free will is the ability to choose freely and control our actions. Basically, free will shows the level of responsibility we claim for our actions and decisions. Obviously, if outside forces determine our choices, we cannot be held responsible for our actions. However, if our choices are made with total freedom than certainly we must claim responsibility for our choices and actions. God is justified in creating a world with the existence of free will which philosophers such as D’Holbach debated over it and provided some objections; meanwhile, free will brought the potential for existence of evil. On the other side, John Bender introduces “The prediction Room” to analyze human‘s free will.

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