Free-Will Vs Determinism

As humans, free will is something we commonly assume we have. When evaluating what free will is, we become less certain. David Hume calls it “the most contentious question of metaphysics.” In simplistic terms, free will is having the ability to determine your own plan of action. There is a relationship between free will and freedom of action and causal determinism that must be evaluated to have a complete understanding of free will. There are compatibilist views that believe in free will and incompatibilist views that imply there is no free will. Free will is also related to both theological determinism and logical determinism.

One of the main questions that we face is whether or not, we as humans have genuine freedom. Are we free to make our own choices? Do we decide what happens in our lives in the future? Or are our lives set pathways in which we have no say at all? Are all our choices already decided? In other words, do we have free will or are our actions pre-determined, or both? Hard determinists, libertarians and soft determinists all set out to provide answers to these questions, holding different views on whether or not free will and determinism are compatible. Both hard determinists and libertarians believe that free will and determinism are incompatible but hard determinists

Now, the argument for freewill states that nothing is determined and everything happens based off our own random actions and nothing is linked. Determinism takes a different route and believes every action is pre-determined and nothing is random because it has already been put in place to happen.

There are many causes and effects for the Europeans to come to America . Some causes were the English Reformation, new materials, new routes to Asia and to escape England. Effects were diseases, religions dying off, lack of food and health problems. The effects weren't all bad though. Some good effects were introduction to horse riding new tools and new land.

In the Philosophy, Determinism has many different categories. Actually according to the textbook, the Determinism is the view that every event, including human actions, are brought about by previous events in accordance with the natural laws that govern the world. Human freedom is an illusion. Jewish philosopher Baruch Spinoza does not deny that people’s wishes and desires will lead to the soul, and he said, "but neglected one important

Determinism, libertarianism and compatibilism are three significantly different views on where unaccountability might stop and where free will and moral responsibility begin. Determinism is the strict opinion that every action and decision is the cause of an event, genetics or the environment prior to that action. Quite the opposite is libertarianism, which happens to be the genuine belief in free will as well as the denial of universal causation. Finally, deep self-compatibilism meshes both of these stand points together and introduces the idea that one’s action can be free if it stems purely out of personal, authentic desire. Since all three judgments have a backbone of convincing

According to Greene and Cohen’s article, the problem of free will pertains to the conflicting definitions of free will and determinism. Free will can be defined as the freedom to decide one’s next state; having free will means that one’s choices do not depend on past events. Oppositely, determinism states that every condition in the present depends on past events and all conditions are entirely based on physical laws. Determinism thus claims that there is only one predetermined way a given agent will act. Based on the definitions of free will and determinism, it appears that free will and determinism cannot both be right. If one’s choices are independent of past events, then physical laws and previous conditions do not determine those choices. If the opposite is true, then free will cannot exist. For most people, aspects of both free will and determinism seem correct even though it cannot be so. This is the problem of free will.

Imagine that there is clear reasoning behind every event in each and everyone of our lives that we cannot control nor manipulate in any way. This is where the argument of “free will vs. determinism” comes into play. The concept of determinism states that outside factors affect our decisions and “free will” and “motivation” are just illusions that conceal the true beliefs towards human behavior (McLeod, 2013). This concept has a lot of support and most behaviorists argue against free will. To put it simply “free will” is the idea that most of our decisions come from within our minds and we are able to change our behaviors (McLeod, 2013). The argument between free will and determinism has scientific evidence for each creating a good amount of

Over the course of time, in the dominion of philosophy, there has been a constant debate involving two major concepts: free will and determinism. Are our paths in life pre-determined? Do we have the ability to make decisions by using our freedom of will? While heavily subjective questions that have been answered many different authors, philosophers, etc., two authors in particular have answered these questions very similarly. David Hume, a Scottish philosopher from the 18th century, argues in his essay “Of Liberty and Necessity” that free will and determinism are compatible ideas, and that they can both be accepted at the same time without being logically incorrect. Alike Hume, 20th century author Harry G. Frankfurt concludes in his essay “Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility” that the two major concepts are compatible. These two authors are among the most famous of Compatibilists (hence the fact that they believe free will and determinism are compatible ideas) in philosophical history. The question that then arises in the realm of compatibilism particularly, is one dealing with moral responsibility: If our paths in life are not totally pre-determined, and we have the ability to make decisions willingly (using free will), then how do we deem an individual morally responsible for a given decision? Frankfurt reaches the conclusion that we are held morally responsible regardless of

Everything happens for a reason. This is a belief accepted by many humans all over the world and is the basis behind decision-making. However, many humans also believe that actions in life are pre-determined by causes external from the will, this belief is the idea behind determinism. Philosopher David Hume believes that both free will and determinism can co-exist even though the two concepts seem to contradict each other. I believe that Hume is correct to believe that free will and determinism can co-exist because determinism explains the outcome of a humans actions and free will explains the motives behind a humans actions.

     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

The idea that the future is already determined is known in philosophy as determinism.  There are various definitions of determinism available; but in this essay, I shall use the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy definition, which is ‘the metaphysical thesis that the facts of the past, in conjunction with the laws of nature, entail every truth about the future

A question which still puzzles many people is do we have free will or is our every decision predetermined? I believe that our every decision is based on free will because when we make the decision to do something, we risk our lives everyday doing what we want rather than just letting things happen such as fate. I think our every decision is based on free will because we decide whether we want to go out and party on a Saturday night or if we want to stay in the house. We decide whether we want to be friends with someone or if we want to keep them as enemies. We decide whether we want to have a boyfriend/girlfriend or if we want to be single and do what we want. We make decisions ourselves, and we do not let things just happen.

The difference is that our choices and actions are largely “determined to occur as a function of our particular psychological makeup and tendencies, and/or mental events and processes that occur beyond the level of conscious awareness and over which we have no or very little control” (Williams & Arrigo, 2008, p.51). For me, this is the most influential factor as we are molded by so many attributes throughout our lives that are not in our control. Under psychological determinism, one is molded at a very early age through the interactions with their parents, family members, educationally and functionally. Ogletree and Archer (2011) argue that a person’s personality is developed at such an early age that it sets our life course more-over, it develops permanent traits that dictate how we think, feel and choose. Similarly, if psychological factors are essentially out of our control, much like biological factors, does it make one any less capable of being held accountable for their actions for something that they had not ability to control? We will explore that

Fate vs free will? The universe vs your mind? Who or what is responsible for the life you lead? Some people believe that the influences in their lives are not reflected in their choices, they are wrong because: the place a person was born in or lives in limits their options of ways to contribute to the world; the personality type and status of friends and family of a person affects his or her decisions in life;