Free Will In Arthur Stanley's Arguments

A number of arguments have been formulated to prove the notion that human beings lack free will. This paper provides and discusses these arguments, which include determinism, randomness, scientific and Arthur Stanley’s arguments. According to determinism objection, all events are as a result of a causing agent (Watson, 2003). This implies that all human behaviors and actions are pre-determined. Therefore, it is logical to argue that the physical world functions in accordance with the rigid and predictable laws implying that people do not have the free will to make a personal decision about what events are about to happen in their lives. For instance, nobody has the will to decide or predict when he or she shall fall ill or get involved in

This is because people could not be held morally responsible for random actions; therefore, they lack free will. According to Arthur Stanley’s argument on free will, there is no half-way relationship between correlated and random behavior. This means that behavior is only either a matter of chance or not a matter of chance. This implies that there is no free will because the outcome of the behavior is precise. The last argument is the scientific argument. It argues that if the atoms travel in different directions by their weight, then people do not have the free will to control the directions in which they travel to since their motions are determined by necessity (Watson, 2003). In light of these arguments, I believe that there is no free will. This is because most of the events are unpredictable from the previous events implying that new causal chains will occur in the future. Therefore, if all actions are pre-determined, then there is no moral responsibility or free

The protagonist of the movie, Captain John Anderson, is determined to prevent murders before their actual occurrences. The Police Division utilizes Precogs to predict the place, time, and scenario of future crimes and murders. The use of this device implies that people have no free will. This is because the Precrime division believes that individuals proven to commit murder in the future cannot avoid this fate. For instance, the Minority Report begins with the Precogs predicting a nearby murder. This makes Anderson react immediately and identify the exact time and location of the predicted murder. Upon arriving at the predicted murder scene, he indeed confirms that the Precog’s prediction was true (Dick, 2009). This means that this society strongly believes in the existence of determinism and not free will. This is because all the murder predictions made were fulfilled implying that the criminals or the suspects had no free will to change their future predicted behaviors or fate. Anderson believes that the use of Precogs is flawless, and its use could help him protect his son from harm. However, this notion changed when the Precogs predicted that he was to kill Leo Crow in less than 36 hours (Dick, 2009). This makes him analyze the minority report to prove that he is innocent. He no longer trust the Precog’s predictions and believes that the world is indeed deterministic, and