Freedom and responsibility

Flags burning under raining bombs, gunshots echoing through a field of raining terror, while hiding underground for the day where humanity can roam free again; situations as so aren’t exactly what people imagine when thinking about one’s future. Every death was honored by those who lived; lives lost during wars of any kind are unlike lives lost in our country today, not for the value of those once living are greater than another, but from how much those lives mean to this day. Establishment and preservation of freedom wasn’t easy and will never be easy; many people served until their last breath, for the freedoms of our lives today. That is why we must continue to grasp for freedom, and to establish and preserve our freedom most effectively we must have the heart to be free, and have united dedication to freedom itself.

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.

Their wills, which are believed to be freely gained, are actually the result of a causal chain originating from birth. The fact that humans are governed by their genes and environment means that the ability to make moral decisions as free agents is illusory. For these reasons, the hard determinist position, which is a sound, science-based theory, seems to be incompatible with the concept of free will.

The debate between free will and determinism is something that will always be relevant, for people will never fully admit that we have no free will. But, while we may feel that we control what we do in life, we simply do not. The argument for free will is that individuals have full control and responsibility over their actions, and what they become in life as a whole (The Impossibility of Moral Responsibility by Galen Strawson, page 16). Determinism, on the other hand, is saying that we have no control over our actions and that everything we do in life is determined by things beyond our control (Strawson, page 7). After analysis of The Impossibility of Moral Responsibility by Galen Strawson and Freedom and Necessity by A. J. Ayer,

Your geography and you beliefs determined greatly who you are as a person but no one had a choice on that during their formative years. So there are so many factors and causes that affect freewill that’s not under the individual’s control. Let’s acknowledge that. In the context of life being a canvas you can visualize your life as a specific and unique individual pathway on the canvas of life with with different choices(options) available as one moves through time. At each moment in time, different choices are available to you within said predetermined path. The pathway is already predetermined because all time exist at all time all the time, but within each moment you’re are presented with certain set of choices (different set of choices are available at different point in time). These choices range from good to evil as far as their impacts are concerned. So this is why it makes sense to say true freewill doesn’t exist but we can make choices within the predetermined path we find ourselves in. If you think about it from a believer point of view, it’s basically God created everyone differently (predetermined path), with different gifts (drives) manifested through choices available to us at each moment in time. Evil and good are natural forces in this world which

It also depends on how we explain free will; free will in this case is how one acts out on their own will. Our genetics can determine how we can act. When our

Losing self-control and becoming aggressive is an example that Pink provided. This because your actions are determined by your anger, not your own choices. An example that limits the possibility of free will, would be in the food industry and choosing what food to consume. Most murderers reason for killing can be traced back to events that happened in the past, usually their childhood. The choices then influenced how they behaved in the future and does not completely defend their actions. The documentary, Fed Up, also shows that our preferences are not actually our own. The food industry pays large sums of money in advertisements and other forms of media to convince consumers what to purchase. Most people would not even consider this to be a restriction of their free will, but yet they are not choosing what their eating. Children are being fed fast food from the school’s cafeteria because big chains like McDonald's, Pizza Hut, and other fattening companies pay their way in. They use flashy commercials and slogans that rope children and their parents into obtaining their products. These corporations have even forced their way into the government, putting pressure on Michelle Obama’s campaign to end childhood obesity. Where is the free will in this? Does anyone really decide

The first matter to be noted is that this view is in no way in contradiction to science. Free will is a natural phenomenon, something that emerged in nature with the emergence of human beings, with their

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

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.

connection between freedom and responsibility is biconditional. I will also claim that if this mistake is

Whether we have free will is widely controversial. The absence of a universal definition poses a primary problem to this question. In this essay, I shall base my argument on a set of three conditions for free will: 1) that the actor is unconstraint in his action, 2) the actor could have acted otherwise and 3) the actor must be ‘ultimately responsible’ (Kane, 2005: 121) for his action. After I have explained them, I shall apply these conditions to three scenarios that cover most, if not any, circumstances that occur when taking choices. The purpose of this essay is to show that if my conditions are true, none of the scenarios is based on free will and thus we do not have free will.

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

With freedom comes true responsibility. What you do depends on who you are and who you are depends on your genetics and earlier experiences which human beings have no control and are not responsible of. You start to gain responsibility for who you are by your later actions. His idea that everything depends on your genetics and early experience plays a role. (4,2) Even with that it wont be able to restore your responsibility because when something is random it is uncaused. This is why human beings are not responsible for their own actions. An example of moral responsibility is if I had to choose between something. (4,4) I could be walking into the mall where I have the exact amount of money to buy the pair of shoes I needed to match my dress for a party. While walking in I was approached by a homeless man asking for money. I have to make my decision to walk right past the man and buy the shoes or give him my money. This idea I do not have the freedom to choose and I am ultimately responsible for the decision I make. A free agent can have irresponsible ultimate responsibility. They are able to believe in moral rights and wrongs, while still being able to deny the coherence of punishment and reward.

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