Defending Hard Determinism Against the Strongest Objections Raised Against It

Defending Hard Determinism Against the Strongest Objections Raised Against It

In this academic essay there will be a clear and defined description

of both hard determinism and its eventual nemesis indeterminism. Based

on these definitions there will be a personal attempt at denying hard

determinism. This will be accomplished through the introduction of

David Hume and his radical philosophy on causality and the relation

this may have on hard determinism, as well as the various

possibilities it may distinguish. Furthermore the Causal Principle

will also be introduced and slandered in its incapability to provide a

concrete defense for hard determinism and its potential in proposing a

solution through indeterminism. All these factors will ultimately

point to the possibility in which when A happens B is likely to happen

but not essentially determined in happening. This will give rise to

the possibility of a random event occurring and therefore the demise

of hard determinism.

Determinism is the doctrine that man’s choices, decisions, and actions

are decided by antecedent causes, inherited or environmental, acting

upon his character: opposed to free will. (Funk & Wagnalls, 349) Hard

Determinism is the belief that everything is determined, the most

aggressive stance within determinism, leaving no possibility or room

for either quantum mechanics, or free will itself. Indeterminism on

the other hand is merely determinism’s denial. Indeterminism

acknowledges the possibility of determinism to a certain degree but

suggests that it is falsified through some uncaused random

accordance’s in the universe.

In understanding or allowing ourselv...

... middle of paper ...

...the causes were the same, he would have to

show that the prior state of the whole universe was exactly the same

in the two cases (Freedom And Necessity, 149), only then would he have

proved that different effects could result from identical causes. Only

then would he have the capability in making such a claim. This is

obviously a ridiculous and an extremely unjust demand, revealing the

lunacy and severe misguided interpretation involved in determinism.

In concluding it is clear to say that hard determinism is refuted by

indeterminism, through the extension of Hume’s causal theory, as well

as the lunacy embedded within the causal principle.

Work Cited

David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section 7

Hans Reichenbach, The Rise of Scientific Philosophy, 157-158

Freedom And Necessity, 146-149.