Free Will And Punishment Essay

Before I begin it is pertinent to note the disparate positions on the problem of human freedom. In "Human Freedom and the Self", Roderick M. Chisholm takes the libertarian stance which is contiguous with the doctrine of incompatibility. Libertarians believe in free will and recognize that freedom and determinism are incompatible. The determinist also follow the doctrine of incompatibility, and according to Chisholm's formulation, their view is that every event involved in an act is caused by some other event. Since they adhere to this type of causality, they believe that all actions are consequential and that freedom of the will is illusory. Compatiblist deny the conflict between free will and determinism. A.J. Ayer makes a

There is much debate over the issue of whether we have complete freedom of the will or if our will caused by something other than our own choosing. There are three positions adopted by philosophers regarding this dispute: determinism, libertarianism, and compatibilism. Determinists believe that freedom of the will does not exist. Since actions are events that have some predetermined cause, no actions can be chosen and thus there is no will to choose. The compatibilist argues that you can have both freedom of the will and determinism. If the causes which led to our actions were different, then we could have acted in another way which is compatible with freedom of the will. Libertarians believe that freedom of the will does exist.

In the United States there are four main goals when it comes to punishment which are retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation (DeJong, 2016, p. 288). The main goals for these punishments are to maintain order over society and to prevent recidivism (DeJong, 2016, p. 288). This ties into the Ecology perspective. By maintaining order over society and preventing recidivism, it ties into all of the issues regarding the Ecology perspective which requires for each issue to address the individual, family, community and society. Maintaining order over society and preventing recidivism strives toward making a safer environment for the individual, family, community and society. There is no universal agreement for making the severity of punishment just or fair (DeJong, 2016, p. 288). When it comes to retribution the person who is getting punished deserves the punishment (DeJong, 2016, p. 289). Retribution refers to when an individual commits a certain crime then that person must receive a punishment proportionate to that crime or suffering that they may have caused towards the victim (DeJong, 2016, p. 289). Regarding deterrence there are two types, general deterrence and specific deterrence (DeJong, 2016, p. 289). General deterrence focuses on the society in general and wants to scare everyone away from committing crimes (DeJong, 2016, p. 289). Specific deterrence focuses on criminals that have already been convicted and wants to prevent them from

At the same time, the Libertarians believe that people have “free will”, and there are no such inevitable results of those behaviors that are controlled by “free will”. Libertarianism has different meanings in different academic fields. From the general level, the libertarianism refers to people’s ability to decide whether or not to do something according to their

The society generally has established customs and moral imperative to guide the conduct of each member of that particular society. These norms designating certain ways in which people ought to live in the society exist in societal laws and moral prescription. The justifications for the ideal practices in the society have been found in the desire to maintain peaceful coexistence in the society. The extent of freedom of an individual is therefore often curtailed for the greater good of the society. These utilitarian considerations have been discussed amidst the concept and rationale of punishment. John Stuart Mill, Michel Foucault and Kantian ethics have been used to justify or refute the notion and rationale of punishment in our society. These ethical perspectives provide useful insight into understanding punishment and its justifications or otherwise. Punishment is necessary as a social control tool and must be exerted with reasonableness and with due regard for the aim for which it is exerted.

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

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

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.

     The topic of freewill vs. determinism has always been something that has interested me. I follow the Christian faith very strongly but my views on the subject vary almost daily. The concept of freewill and determinism is something that, as a Christian, I often struggle with. By no means do I think that I have all the answers or that I am right. I believe that in order to find the truth or what is right you have to be willing to accept that everything you believe could be false. This is a topic that I have asked about and debated with many different Christian leaders including pastors, missionaries and youth ministers, as well as other people belonging to different faiths. No

History has seen man strive for utopian societies. From the early attempts like Brooks Farm or the Shakers to the more modern Jonestown, each of these societies was a failure. They failed because the people who lived in them became unhappy with the loss of their freedom to do what they wanted. Therefore, because mankind is inherently imperfect, a utopian society is naturally unattainable unless man’s greatest gift, free will, is sacrificed.

The problem of free will is the question whether humans truly have free will or not. Some believe in determinism, which is the belief that everything is already pre-determined and is controlled by a constant chain of causes. Others believe in free will which in its philosophical definition, that one must at least make some choices out of one own desires without constraint or pressure from outside sources. One prominent view of free will is compatibilism; which is the idea that even though they believe determinism is in fact true, some actions can still be free as they can act based on one’s own desires, also known as soft

Fate, as described in the Oxford English Dictionary, is “The principle, power, or agency by which, according to certain philosophical and popular systems of belief, all events, or some events in particular, are unalterably predetermined from eternity.” To the western world, fate is perceived as “a sentence or doom of the gods” (Oxford). They often sought prophecies of the gods, especially from Apollo, the god of knowledge. The Greeks would seek prophecies usually when they had doubts about something, or if they were afraid or in despair. When the gods made a prophecy, the Greeks put all their faith in it and believed that it would happen. When their prophecies did come true, was it really fate that

"From 'On Crimes and Punishment'" by Cesare Beccaria is an excerpt from On Crimes and Punishment. In his address to the public, particularly those in political positions, Beccaria discusses the way we as a society choose to carry out the law. What he calls "useless severity" of punishment encompasses his thoughts on extremes such as capital punishment and the cruelties that we allow our government to inflict upon its own people in a failing attempt to bring order to our society. The death penalty has plagued our society for centuries, perhaps beginning with the idea of human sacrifice that has been turned around as a cycle of never-ending death and cruelty. The writing techniques employed by

For as long as there has been an educational system, teachers and administration have used various forms of punishment to manage student behavior. In America today, there are fifteen states that that expressly permit the use of corporal punishment and seven more that do not prohibit the use of corporal punishment in schools (Turner, 2016). At the same time, the U.S. Department of Education has established the National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports. This variance in the condoning of punishment by the U.S. Government and promotion of Positive Behavior Intervention from the U.S. Department of Education leads to the question of the best way to manage student behaviors in

Governments have several theories to support the use of punishment to maintain order in society. A theory of punishment used by government is utilitarianism. The utilitarian theory of punishment seeks to penalize offenders to discourage or deter future wrongdoing. Since the theory of utilitarianism revolves around the greater good of the whole society, it implies that laws should be used to maximize the happiness of society. Since crime and punishment are on the opposite end of the spectrum of happiness, they should be kept to a minimum. Understanding that there is no such thing as a crime free society, punishment should only be inflicted upon those to prevent future crimes.