Free Will vs. Determinism: Do You Create Your Own Destiny, or Is It Redetermined?

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.

There are those who think that our behavior is a result of free choice, but there are also others who believe we are servants of cosmic destiny, and that behavior is nothing but a reflex of heredity and environment. The position of determinism is that every event is the necessary outcome of a cause or set of causes, and everything is a consequence of external forces, and such forces produce all that happens. Therefore, according to this statement, man is not free.

Determinism is based off this notion that all events are pre-determined, without influence by human actions. If this is true, we can imply that people do not have free will and thus are not responsible for their actions. In Oedipus the King we see that the dichotomy of fate and free will is hazed by the hyperbole of events, which can make it difficult, but possible, to determine if humans even have free will. Through Oedipus’s flaws and decisions and Sophocles use of the imagery of a crossroad it is apparent that free will can be exercised in a meaningful way.

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

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.

It has been debated over centuries whether us humans have control over our destiny, and if we are really able to decide on our own. The controversy between free will and determinism has been argued about for years. If we look into a dictionary, free will is define as the power given to human beings to be able to make free choices that is unconstrained by external circumstances or a force such as fate or divine intervention. Determinism is defined as a philosophical doctrine that every event, act, and decision is the inescapable consequence of antecedents that are independent of the human will. Determinism states that humans have no free will to choose what they wish. Due to this fact, contemporary philosophers cannot agree whether free will does exist, let alone it be a divine influence.

In part five of the textbook, Philosophy: The Quest For the Truth, the concept of freedom of the will and determinism is discussed in great lengths. The argument of free will and determinism between psychologists and philosophers has existed for centuries. People who are determined assume that outside, as well as internal forces, determine behavior. In addition to this they understand that although this is true in their eyes, people are free to choose their own behavior. According to the textbook, Philosophers assume that people seem to accept determinism, which is defined as being, “the view that events are determined or necessitated by preceding physical causes and the laws of nature (394)”. This being valid brings up many questions that

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.

One aspect of human existence that I think is particularly interesting is the extent of control of which we have over the decisions we make. In life, there are many decisions to be made, from simple ones that seem almost subconscious to complex decisions that can take days to ponder on. There are decisions that we make that directly affect others, indirectly affect others, and decisions that we believe do not affect others, or even ourselves, at all. There are decisions that we believe do not matter and would have no impact on our existence. Two theories that shed some light on these aspects are the theory of determinism from

For centuries, there have been questions regarding free will and determinism. Free will is a human value that has inspired many individuals throughout history. These concepts of free will and determinism have inspired many poets, spiritualist, philosophers, and activist. There have been numerous philosophers who believe free will is a part of our human nature, and are continually questioning the concept of free will, constantly attempting to understand its ' true meaning. In contrast to free will, there is determinism, which seems to bring many conflicts when regarding free will.

Are you really free to choose? Over many years this question has boggled the minds of philosopher. It may seem as though things that happen throughout the course of your live are by accident, when in fact, they are completely and entirely predetermined. It had been stated by great philosopher, Leucippus, “nothing occurs at random, but everything for a reason and of necessity.”(Leucippus, Fragment 569 - from Fr. 2 Actius I, 25, 4) Therefore, human behaviour is the result of deterministic forces, rather than decisions based on free will. To understand, first, one must have a firm understanding on the difference between both, free will and determinism. Thought the idea of total control over any given situation sounds ideal to most, it is however,

The concept of determinism, compatibilism and libertarianism is truly trying to explain if we are free and if so how much. Some of us believe that we are the masters of our fate, our soul while others believe our destiny is predetermined and that we are bound to a certain set goal in life. The concepts of determinism, compatibilism and libertarianism try to help aid in that discussion and help enlighten us on what we believe is the correct ideology. It is therefore extremely important to define what each of these three concepts mean before comparing and contrasting the various arguments that each present.

The controversy between freewill and determinism has been argued about for years. Freewill is defined as the belief that our behaviour is under our own control and do not act in response to any internal or external factors. Freewill has been found to have four different conditions and to have freewill at least two conditions must be obtained, these are; people have a choice on their actions, have not been coerced by anything or anyone, have full voluntary and deliberate control of what they do. One example of freewill in psychology is Humanism. The humanists are in favour of freewill as they believe that humans aren't ever determined to behave in a certain way.

If all our actions are determined, then are thoughts would be too. Then the thoughts of the determinists would be determined. However, that would invalidate their claim to objective inquiry. Therefore determinism leads to a self-contradiction. Free will is not subject to that problem.

Freedom and power are luxuries all humans desire. Since the dawn of humanity, man struggled and persevered through nature’s unforgiving vicissitudes, but emerged fervently from them with the stern intent of actuating his ever-evolving desires. The debate between determinism and free will has raged since antiquity, and the main difference between them lies in an element of control; the one outer and the other inner, respectively. Determinism is the "philosophical idea that every event or state of affairs, including every human decision and action, is the inevitable and necessary consequence of antecedent states of affairs." Free will, on the other hand, is the "power of acting without the constraint of necessity or