Free Will and Choices

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.

Over time, numerous philosophers have dabbled at the concepts surrounding free will, forming their own beliefs that either relate or reject other philosophical views. Free will is defined as the ability to choose between different possible courses of action. Epicurus, Stoics, and John Locke portray arguments about their beliefs on free will. Many times, each philosophical view of the three were influenced by aspects of another philosopher, especially Aristotle. Although their beliefs are unique, each philosophical view can be connected together. All three philosophical views either promote or reject the ideology of determinism referring to the issue of free will. I accept the Stoics beliefs on free will due to freedom resembling a person’s choices to do what he or she wants to do in life.

In the reading “Existentialism is a Humanism”, the author Jean-Paul Sartre presents the idea of Existentialism. He introduces this idea by stating that man’s plan in this world is not pre-determined, as we only determine who we are or who we want to become throughout life. Sartre states that a person is what a person does. He also uses a metaphoric scenario of a man jumping on a scene before defining himself. These two ideas imply that man has no ultimate meaning, and it is up to us to find it through experience and by taking action. Additionally, Sartre also implies that humans have a huge responsibility on becoming who they want to become as it is only up to them to do so, making us entirely responsible for our existence.

People believe that genuine freedom of choice is not always possible because our decisions and actions are determined by factors beyond our control. This view is known as Determinism. There is also an extreme form of determinism known as ‘hard determinism,’ in which they believe that every demeanor can be traced to a cause, although they may disagree about what those causes are. The idea of determinism poses a difficult issue to the concept of ‘free will’. Are we able to make free choices if all our thoughts and actions are predetermined by our own past and the physical laws of nature? Majority of us would like to believe that we have the freedom of will and are able to make decisions based on our own discretion but, I personally believe that the deterministic view holds true to a certain extent and that most of our actions are a result of a force that is beyond our comprehension. My purpose in this essay is to explain and critically analyze Baron d’Holbach’s view on determinism.

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.

The arguments presented by D’Holbach and Hobart contain many of the same premises and opinions regarding the human mind, but nonetheless differ in their conclusion on whether we have free will. In this paper, I will explain how their individual interpretations of the meaning of free will resulted in having contrary arguments.

Some proponents of free will argue that by choosing to do something, one causes oneself to act. One could have caused oneself to act in another manner, and therefore the act, although caused by that person, is still a free choice. However, that notion is held under scrutiny because a person who acts freely has no evidence that they have acted of his or her own accord. For all one knows, one’s actions and choices could have been causally determined, and although one thought one was acting out of free will, one is not. There is no definite proof to show that one’s choices are made freely. As A.J. Ayer stated in his essay, Freedom and Necessity, “…but from the fact that a man is unaware of the causes of his action, it does not follow that no such causes exist” (Ayer 272). Since there is no way of knowing if one exercises free will, determinism poses a serious threat to the concept of free thinking and free acting human beings.

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.

Sartre proposes an interesting view on free will when he says, "either man is wholly determined or else man is wholly free." This quote shows us that Sartre believes that man is free to do what he wants. For Sartre, freedom is the most basic value, which renders possible all other values the way our fundamental plan precedes and grounds our small choices. In that sense freedom is the source of all values. It is not logically possible to make sense of human responsibility and notions of justice without a conception of free will. This is because it is free will that allows us as humans to choose and make the right decisions in life.

My second notion of free will requires that an actor is able to decide between different possibilities of actions that lead towards different futures. Robert Kane calls this concept ‘a garden of forking paths’; every action leads to other actions that again allow for alternatives of action (Kane, 2005: 7). If an actor could not have done otherwise, he would not have had free choice. Even if he did not choose to do otherwise, he could not have done so. Free will seems to require the power to do otherwise, or our actions would

In this always changing world, we all possess the extraordinary power of freewill. The ability to make a wide variety of choices depending on the situation that is presented in front of us, which induces an outcome whether it may be good or bad that is reliant on the perspective. Every single choice you make based on your judgment will affect or make a difference to almost anything that exists on this world no matter how little or big it may be. Samuel Taylor Coleridge uses imagery in "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner" to successfully reflect his emotions about the consequences of one's actions. A wonderful example of imagery is in lines 29 through 32 " All in a hot and copper sky, The bloody sun, at noon, Right up above the mast did stand, No bigger than the moon."

The Free Will Problem presents three different theses that, upon first glance, seem both intuitive and reasonable as long as they are considered independently. It is not possible to entertain all three theses together while maintaining any level of consistency. The problem, therefore, is in determining which of the three theses to discard.

The alarm clock sounds, you get up and stand before your wardrobe, facing a decision. The white shirt or the blue, both clean, both equally nice, but it is still an easy decision. The blue. You revel in your creativity and ready yourself for the day to come. The freedom you have always known permitted the choice, your free will grants you this privilege. Or does it? Free will is a false concept often confused with free choice. Free will does not truly exist, the limitations set by nature and the influence of other people hinder the ability to choose without the impact of past experiences.

Kant and Hegel felt that our free will gives us the ability to reason and should think through our mental abilities. Our choices that we make of the world obtains our desired result. These choices that we make are in our genetics that we have and the experiences make us who we are. Daniel Dennett is a compatibilist he believes that the only free will that we have is the free will that we think we have. If people feel like they have free will then they will have free will. Quantum Mechanics feel that our free will is that the human consciousness has super powers and that the universe hold the potential for the human conscious to exist. Some other quantum mechanics feel that protons and electrons take on random values and this makes up our free will. Buddhist feel that in order to have feel will that we must have freedom from physical necessity. We must not have constraints of the natural world. We need to have a duel view of reality for us to operate from the physical world when we are immersed into free will. In order for this to happen the pineal gland in our brain would have to have a connection to the physical world and the non-physical world. For free will to take effect in this it should only be one-way. Our will should be free and should not be acted upon. Frankenstein Argument says that we must create ourselves. We are only responsible for the person that we have created when we created ourselves. (Reeve, 2013)

Jean Paul Sartre is a philosopher that supports the philosophy of existentialism. Existentialism is a twentieth century philosophy that denies any crucial human nature and embraces that each of us produces our own essence through our free actions. Existentialists like Sartre believe there isn’t a God that determines people’s nature. So, existentialists believe that humans have no purpose or nature except the ones that they create for themselves. We are free and responsible for what we are and our engagements; even though we are mindful that this can cause agony.