Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Debate on freedom and determinism
Debate on freedom and determinism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Debate on freedom and determinism
In this paper, I will argue that Determinism is true. First, I will explain the reason behind determinism and what it is. Next, I will show you why its import and how it affects everyone's life. Then, I will show the strengths of my reasons. Finally, I will give reasons for supporting my position. Determinism is true because life isn't free will. It is predetermined by cause and effects. You should believe in determinism because you don't have free will over life, the reason for determinism is physics. The physics of determinism is known as cause and effect. Prior events determine events in life. We can understand determinism by a comparison to a clock. A clock that is wound up at the beginning of time and has been ticking using Newtons …show more content…
In early 2000 a man was arrested for child pornography and molesting his 8-year-old stepdaughter. When taken to jail, they asked what made you do it. His response was " suddenly I began to have intense sexual urges." He had no previous history of pedophilia. As he awaited his day in court, he began to complain of headaches. They took him to the doctor to discover a tumor in his frontal cortex known to control sexual impulses. It was removed, and the sexual urges immediately went away. Most would say "this was a coincidence, but no, it happened again a few months later, and he had to have another surgery to remove another tumor that had the same effects. You may ask what does that have to do with determinism. Everything. His free will didn't tell him to commit a perverted crime, but it was all predetermined by determinism for it to happen. I do not support any crimes of such nature, and I'm not making an excuse for it …show more content…
It's not about whether you believe or not. Think about your day to day life, most things are not planned by you, right? Then ask yourself, "by who"? The answer to those questions are throughout this entire essay. I've given you everything you need to understand how determinism works. If it makes you feel better, we can call it God. Determinism is true because life isn't free will its predetermined by cause and effects, you should believe in determinism because you don't have free will over everything in your life, the reason for determinism is physics. Determinism is known as; "things that are fated”, it is inevitable. Aetius and other stoics describe the fate as "a sequence of causes that is an inescapable ordering and interconnection" (Sellars, 2006).The stoics simply just say that faith is the cause of all consequences in life. The ordering of our faith cannot be rearranged or altered in any way. Aetius and other Stoics believed that the world is a unity and includes all existing things within it (Stoicism, 55N). It is governed by a living, rational, intelligent, nature government of existing things. The things that happen first calls us to the things that happen after them. So, in reality, all things are brought together by fate and reason. The Stoics are saying that nothing can exist, nor happen without there being pre-determinism. The stoics list of causes is; preliminary causes, joint-causes, and sustaining causes. The Government who governs
The strongest objection to determinism is in my view the following: (3) Truth, i.e., accurate knowledge of the facts of a case is only possible for me when I can cognitively get involved with the subject. However, the precondition for this is that I am not determined by irrelevant constraints in connection with the subject — e.g., by physical factors or by my own biological-genetic constitution, but also not by prejudices and preconcieved notions: precisely because I could not involve myself in the subject because of such constraints. Reduced to a formula, this means: truth presupposes freedom.
Determinism, a doctrine that all events, including human action, are ultimately determined by causes external to the will, especially when up against nature. An influential component found in naturalistic writing, London, Garland, and Crane each lend their writing to this movement, realism, modeled after the writings of Darwin, Marx, and Freud. Determinism, generally pessimistic, presents itself in the form of Koskoosh, an elderly, blind man left to die by his tribe. This indigenous, cold-climate tribe embraces the “survival of the fittest” mentality. Simply surviving was a burden for this tribe and they certainly did not have the resources to sustain a dependent person. The story mentions the good times when the dogs and people were fat, as
The argument of free will and determinism is a very complex argument. Some might say we have free will because we are in control; we have the ability to make our own choices. Others might say it’s in our biological nature to do the things we do; it’s beyond our control. Basically our life experiences and choices are already pre determined and there’s nothing we can do to change it. Many philosophers have made very strong arguments that support both sides.
Consider this argument: 'If the future is already determined, then it must be possible to know in advance what will happen. But, if that is so, then free will is impossible.' Do you agree? Is there any satisfactory way of acting freely if determinism is true?
In philosophy today, free will is defined as, “the power of human beings to choose certain actions, uninfluenced by pressure of any sort, when a number of other options are simultaneously possible.” Philosophers have debated the issue of whether humans truly possess free will since ancient times. Some argue that humans act freely, while others believe that, “Every event, including our choices and decisions, is determined by previous events and the laws of nature—that is, given the past and the laws of nature, every event could not have been otherwise,” which is an idea known as determinism (Barry, #14). This relationship between free will and determinism continues to puzzle philosophers into the twenty-first century. An example of a piece to the free will puzzle, are the schools of thought of Incompatibilism and Compatibilism. Incompatibilism is defined as,
Over the past decade, scientists have conducted research on the effects of a belief in determinism, a belief that one acts with predetermined outcomes, on behavior and values of people. In two 2008 studies,
Determinism is the theory that everything is caused by antecedent conditions, and such things cannot be other than how they are. Though no theory concerning this issue has been entirely successful, many theories present alternatives as to how it can be approached. Two of the most basic metaphysical theories concerning freedom and determinism are soft determinism and hard determinism.
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.
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.
Determinism currently takes two related forms: hard determinism and soft determinism [1][1]. Hard determinism claims that the human personality is subject to, and a product of, natural forces. All of our choices can be accounted for by reference to environmental, social, cultural, physiological and hereditary (biological) causes. Our total character is a product of these environmental, social, cultural, physiological and hereditary forces, thus our beliefs, desires, values and habits are all outside of our control. The hard determinist, therefore, claims that our choices are determined by these factors; free will is an illusion because the choices and decisions we make are derived from our character, which is completely out of our control in creating. An example might help illustrate this point. Consider a man who has just repeatedly stabbed another man outside of a bar; the other man is dead. The hard determinist would argue that there were factors outside of the killer’s control which led him to this action. As a child, he was constantly beaten by his father and was the object of ridicule and contempt of his classmates. This trend of hard luck would continue all his life. Coupled with the fact that he has a gene that has been identified with male aggression, he could not control himself when he pulled the knife out and started stabbing the other man. All this aggression, and all this history were the determinate cause of his action.
The determinist believes that man cannot act freely if his actions are causally determined. As Philosopher A.J. Ayer suggests in Freedom and Necessity, if a man has a choice between choosing A or B, there will be a consistent explanation
The discussion of free will and its compatibility with determinism comes down to one’s conception of actions. Most philosophers and physicists would agree that events have specific causes, especially events in nature. The question becomes more controversial when philosophers discuss the interaction between human beings, or agents, and the world. If one holds the belief that all actions and events are caused by prior events, it would seem as though he would be accepting determinism
The discussion of free will and its compatibility with determinism comes down to one’s conception of actions. Most philosophers and physicists would agree that events have specific causes, especially events in nature. The question becomes more controversial when philosophers discuss the interaction between human beings, or agents, and the world. If one holds the belief that all actions and events are caused by prior events, it would seem as though he would be accepting determinism. For if an event has a particular cause, the event which follows must be predetermined, even if this cause relates to a decision by a human being. Agent causation becomes important for many philosophers who, like me, refuse to accept the absence of free will in the universe.
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).
Hard determinism received its greatest influence from the physicist Isaac Newton, and his studies in physics and his idea of the universe as “matter in motion”.