A Critical Analysis Of The Dilemma Of Indeterminism

1067 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Determinism discussion

The dilemma of determinism is an issue that has led to widespread debate over whether or not people have free will. The dilemma of determinism follows as such; (A) if determinism is true, we are not responsible, since our choices are determined by factors we can’t control, (B) Indeterminism is true, we are not responsible, since every choice happens by chance, (C) But either determinism or indeterminism is true, (D) Therefore, we are not morally responsible for what we do. Simply, the dilemma states that we cannot be free and therefore are not responsible for our choices. This dilemma has been approached by some people called compatibilists who believe that we can be responsible for our choices even though the choice was determined in advance. …show more content…

The principle of alternate possibilities is the idea that a person is morally responsible for what he has done only if he could have done otherwise. The main purpose of Frankfurt’s argument is to prove that this principle of alternate possibility is false by finding a counter example that proves a person can be morally responsible even if they can’t change the predetermined outcome. To do this, Frankfurt uses a set of thought arguments that approach different scenarios in which a person is placed in a situation where there are a set of conditions for a certain choice to be made, so that it is impossible for the person to choose to do different. However, these conditions do not in any way affect the choice that the person …show more content…

In this argument, there is a man named Black who wants Jones 4 to perform a certain action. If Jones 4 decides for himself to perform the action, then Black will do nothing; but if Jones 4 chooses not to perform the action, then Black will take measures to ensure that Jones 4 does complete the action. Frankfurt leaves the “measures” up to imagination for anyone with theory’s concerning what “could have done otherwise” means. Frankfurt states that no matter how “could have done otherwise” is defined, this example of Jones 4 is a successful counterexample to the principle of alternate possibilities. Therefore, even if casual determinism is true, there is no reason to believe that people cannot still be morally responsible for their behavior. Frankfurt even goes on to say that he believes that premise (A) should instead be phrased as such: a person is not morally responsible for what he has done if he did it only because he could not have done otherwise. This revision takes into account the invalid assumption that coercion makes moral responsibility

Show More
Related

  • The Ideant Of Peter Van Inwagen And The Consequence Argument

    1173 Words  | 3 Pages

    Compatibilist like Peter van Inwagen believes that freedom can be present or absent in any situations. One of the famous Consequence Argument on compatibilism is by Peter van Inwagen who says: “If determinism is true, then our acts are the consequences of the laws of nature and events in the remote past. But it is not up to us what went on before we were born, and neither is it up to us what the laws of nature are. Therefore, the consequences of these things (including our present acts) are not up to us."1 The contradiction here is that human cannot refrain from performing free will. Therefore, determinism cannot abolish free will. He also mentions that if determinism is true then no one has power over the facts of the past and the laws of nature. Therefore, no one has power over the facts of the future, and, also, have no control over the consequences of one’s behavior. For example, he expresses how compatibilism has been in existence before laws were even made. Since laws put certain restrictions on human’s free will, it should not stop humans from doing what he or she wants to do. He also expresses how society and nature should not determine one’s own free will because it can never be taken away from humans. Humans are incapable of knowing what the future looks like, therefore they cannot be morally responsible for the

    Read More

  • Roderick Chisholm on freedom of the will

    694 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Luck Swallows Everything Analysis

    2046 Words  | 5 Pages

    “Are we free agents? Can we be responsible for what we do” (Strawson 225) This is the issue that Strawson brings to light in his essay. He begins to explain the notion of free will and responsibility in a compatibilist’s view. They believe that free will and determinism are compatible

    Read More

  • Analysis of Roderick Chisholm's 'Human Freedom and the Self'

    1447 Words  | 3 Pages

    Besides in the case of constraint, (A) the agent could have done otherwise. Then, by extension, it would also be equal to say that (B) if the agent had chosen to do otherwise, then he would have done otherwise. As Chisholm describes, this later statement is clearly in a accordance with determinism as, even if by an exaggerated chain of causal events, it can be seen that if he had decided to do otherwise, he would have done so. Under this conclusion, if (B) is in agreement with determinism, and (A) and (B) are of equal value, (A) would also be deterministic in nature. Accordingly, it would then be possible to find that (A) is both consistent with determinism and moral responsibility, and that these two theories must also be equal with one another. Additionally, under very specific circumstances it could be possible to find (B) to be true while (A) to be false, such as in the case of a man who, unbeknownst to him, is locked in a certain room with no way out. However, the man in this case is certainly content in the aforementioned room with no intention of leaving. If he had wanted to leave he is of the belief that he would be able to do so, proving (B) true. This is despite the fact that he would not have done this, as he is not able to, showing (A) to be false. Therefore we can see the need for an additional statement (C), he could have

    Read More

  • Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility by Harry Frankfurt

    785 Words  | 2 Pages

    In “Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility”, Harry Frankfurt attempts to falsify the Principle of Alternate Possibilities. The Principle of Alternate Possibilities is the principle where a person is morally responsible for what he has done only if he could have done otherwise. A person would be morally responsible for their own actions if done by themselves. If someone else had forced that person to do the action, then the person doing the action is not morally responsible. Frankfurt does not believe this to be true and that the person doing the action is morally responsible. Frankfurt’s objections towards the Principle of Alternate Possibilities shows the refutation of natural intuition and places moral responsibility upon those who deserve it.

    Read More

  • Free Will and Determinism of Ayer and Holbach

    1810 Words  | 4 Pages

    In respect to the arguments of Ayer and Holbach, the dilemma of determinism and its compatibility with that of free will are found to be in question. Holbach makes a strong case for hard determinism in his System of Nature, in which he defines determinism to be a doctrine that everything and most importantly human actions are caused, and it follows that we are not free and therefore haven’t any moral responsibility in regard to our actions. For Ayer, a compatibilist believing that free will is compatible with determinism, it is the reconciliation and dissolution of the problem of determinism and moral responsibility with free willing that is argued. Ayer believes that this problem can be dissolved by the clarification of language usage and the clarification of what freedom is in relationship to those things that oppose freedom or restrain it. In either case, what is at stake is the free will of an agent, and whether or not that agent is morally responsible. What is to be seen from a discussion of these arguments is the applicability and validity of these two philosophies to situations where one must make a choice, and whether or not that person is acting freely and is thus responsible given his current situation. In this vein, the case of Socrates’ imprisonment and whether or not he acted freely in respect to his decision to leave or stay in prison can be evaluated by the discussion of the arguments presented in respect to the nature of free will in its reconciliation with determinism in the compatibilist vein and its absence in the causality of hard determinism.

    Read More

  • Sally's Prescriptive Moral Theory

    1421 Words  | 3 Pages

    middle of paper ... ... Essentially, the only fault being addressed is the conflicting action, as a conflict no longer occurs. Objections remain based on the inclusion of moral agents exclusively and the promotion of an individual’s goals, while introducing the additional problem of self-interest that accompanies prominent autonomy. The theory remains at fault, as it cannot be adequately amended by a single change.

    Read More

  • Freedom of the Will and the Concept of a Person by Harry Frankfurt

    1236 Words  | 3 Pages

    In “Freedom of the Will and the Concept of a Person”, Harry Frankfurt illustrates the concepts of freedom of will and freedom of action, but more importantly, Frankfurt has refined the compatibilism theory. Compatibilism allows the freedom of will to exist in the deterministic world. According to determinism theory, the future state of worlds is determined by some events in the distant past (E) and the laws of nature (L). More specifically, E refers to the history, such as experiences or states whereas L refers to scientific or physical law like gravity. For example, an alcoholic’s action is determined that he will not stop drinking. Here E is that he had been drinking in the past, and L is the physiological addiction effect caused by alcohol. As we can control neither E nor L, then it follows that we can never act free. The thesis of compatibilist, however, states that we may have free will, even if all of our actions are determined by forces beyond our controls.

    Read More

  • Libertarianism

    1135 Words  | 3 Pages

    For centuries philosophers have debated over the presence of free will. As a result of these often-heated arguments, many factions have evolved, the two most prominent being the schools of Libertarianism and of Determinism. Within these two schools of thought lies another debate, that of compatibilism, or whether or not the two believes can co-exist. In his essay, Has the Self “Free Will”?, C.A. Campbell, a staunch non-compatiblist and libertarian, attempts to explain the Libertarian argument.

    Read More

  • Freedom and Determinism in Richard Taylor’s Metaphysics

    859 Words  | 2 Pages

    Soft determinism attempts to make the disagreeing data of determinism and freedom compatible. The theory of soft determinism rests on three fundamental claims: (1) the deterministic concept that human behaviour is causally determined; (2) that there is freedom in voluntary behaviour, so long as there is no physical impediment or constraint upon the action; and (3) that the cause of the voluntary behaviour (which is possible in the absence of impediments or constraints) is an internal state of the agent of the action. According to soft determinism, therefore, we are responsible for our actions on o...

    Read More

  • Libertarianism is the Best Philosophy

    1632 Words  | 4 Pages

    All in all, each view about the philosophy of free will and determinism has many propositions, objects and counter-objections. In this essay, I have shown the best propositions for Libertarianism, as well as one opposition for it which I gave a counter-objection. Additionally, I have explained the Compatabalistic and Hard Deterministic views to which I gave objections. In the end, whether it is determinism or indeterminism, both are loaded with difficulties; however, I have provided the best explanation to free will and determinism and to an agent being morally responsible.

    Read More

  • Free Will and Determinism

    1633 Words  | 4 Pages

    The problem of free will and determinism is a mystery about what human beings are able to do. The best way to describe it is to think of the alternatives taken into consideration when someone is deciding what to do, as being parts of various “alternative features” (Van-Inwagen). Robert Kane argues for a new version of libertarianism with an indeterminist element. He believes that deeper freedom is not an illusion. Derk Pereboom takes an agnostic approach about causal determinism and sees himself as a hard incompatibilist. I will argue against Kane and for Pereboom, because I believe that Kane struggles to present an argument that is compatible with the latest scientific views of the world.

    Read More

  • Is Compatibilism True?

    1285 Words  | 3 Pages

    Free will is the ability for a person to make their own decisions without the constraints of necessity and fate, in other words, their actions are not determined. Determinism is the view that the initial conditions of the universe and all possible worlds are the same, including the laws of nature, causing all events to play out the same. Events are determined by the initial conditions. Two prominent positions advocated concerning the relation between free will and determinism are compatibilism and incompatibilism. In this essay I shall argue that compatibilism is true. Firstly, I shall explain what compatibilism is and consider possible objections and responses to the theory. I shall then examine incompatibilism and evaluate its strengths and weaknesses and argue that compatibilism is a stronger argument and, as a result, show why it is also true.

    Read More

  • Stan The Strangler Analysis

    1409 Words  | 3 Pages

    I believe this for two reasons, the first being that his arguments seem to be fundamentally rooted in science and human intuition. His view is based on genes, environment, and how we are conditioned to judge based on results. The second reason I is simple, his views fit perfectly into a deterministic world. At first glance Frankfurt’s argument rejecting the ability to do otherwise using the Jones and Black case is seemingly plausible, however, this argument is faulty proven by one major objection. The objection stating that Jones had the ability to decide otherwise also known as the “flicker of freedom.” This objection renders Frankfurt’s entire argument illegitimate. As I said before the whole argument takes us in a circle without any real closure. I and many others conclude that the Jones and Black case does not in fact succeed in establishing that an agent does not need the ATDO in order to have free will.

    Read More

  • Freedom and Determinism

    2359 Words  | 5 Pages

    Freedom, or the concept of free will seems to be an elusive theory, yet many of us believe in it implicitly. On the opposite end of the spectrum of philosophical theories regarding freedom is determinism, which poses a direct threat to human free will. If outside forces of which I have no control over influence everything I do throughout my life, I cannot say I am a free agent and the author of my own actions. Since I have neither the power to change the laws of nature, nor to change the past, I am unable to attribute freedom of choice to myself. However, understanding the meaning of free will is necessary in order to decide whether or not it exists (Orloff, 2002).

    Read More

More about A Critical Analysis Of The Dilemma Of Indeterminism

Open Document