Incompatibilism Analysis

1274 Words3 Pages

Freewill has been thoroughly discussed by ancient philosophers and modern scientist alike yet no conclusion has ever been reached. With the issue that whether freewill is consistent or inconsistent with the idea that everything happens out of mechanistically that is deemed appropriate by the universe. There are three common camps of thoughts on the matter of free will. Determinism and Libertarianism and Compatibilism. This essay argues the fact that freewill is indeed not an illusion and attempts to redress the balance between these camps of thoughts by offering an overview of strategy via that of a Compatibilism point of view.

Humans are a determined and free agents that has the ability to critique and modify their behaviours. The term …show more content…

Imagine the modal operator that is involved with the Consequence Argument is in terms of having the ability to do otherwise. That is to say that the individual has no say in the choices she made about a particular action as there are no choices to be made. An incompatibilists will point out that a being is free only if determinism is false. If this statement is indeed true, this does not explain the conjunction of the past and the laws of nature is not sufficient (Chisholm, 1967). A compatibilists, will point out on the other hand that an individual is free to choose an alternate action. In other words, saying that an agent could have done otherwise is to say that the agent would have done otherwise in a different counterfactual condition. But saying this is entirely consistent with one way of understanding the ability to do otherwise. An agent would perform a different action if given the opportunity which affects the past and the laws of nature which contradicts the theory held by an incompatibilists. Many compatibilists pointed out that agents have counterfactual powers that is able to influence the past, while some say over the future. In spite of that, both methods provide the compatibilists a solid solution relating to the conclusion of the Consequence Argument by presenting a plausible differences between what an agent would do even if the choice is forced upon in comparison to that of an agent would have done if he or she has specific wishes and needs in that deed

Open Document