Free Will Robert Harris

1261 Words3 Pages

1) Free will and Determinism being true.
Philosophers have pondered over the subject of free will for decades and there still hasn’t been a definite answer to the question of free will. What does free will truly mean? Is it just a figure of our imagination? Or is it something that has been around since the creation of men? These are only a small fraction of questions the topic of free will arises. Free will can be broken down into smaller and fewer overcomplicated categories. A normal person like you has free will if our universe revolves around the fact of determinism, if you believe this theory, then you’d be considered a compatibilist. Compatibilism allows us to hold people responsible for their actions. You believe that the reason why …show more content…

On July 5, 1978, Robert Harris took the life of two innocent teenage boys that were just trying to enjoy their burgers in a car. Robert, 25 premeditated the ending to these innocent teens by stealing and then driving the car into a canyon where he repeated shot the boys as they tried to escape from this monster. On top of everything that Robert did to these boys, the most sickening part is when he took their burgers and laughed about the murder well eating it. Robert Harris was sentenced to death row for the murder of John Mayeski and Michael …show more content…

Although, there are people such a classical compatibilist that could argue that if Robert wanted to do otherwise then he would be able to, but if he was not able to then he was not able not to not want to commit this act. This can also be considered as the conditional analysis. Let’s take it one step at a time; If Robert wanted to not kill the innocent boys then he would not kill them, although the fact that he did kill them meant he was not able to do otherwise which brings us to believe that he did not have free will. A classical compatibilist would argue that Robert should not be blamed for his actions because he was not acting on free will and that he did not have free will coming up to the murder of the innocent

Show More
Related

  • The Thin Blue Line Sparknotes

    546 Words  | 2 Pages

    On the night of November 28th 1976, 28-year-old Randall Adams was hitchhiking on a Dallas road when 16-year-old David Harris picked him up. Harris, a runaway from Texas had stolen the car along with his father’s shotgun. They spent the day together and that night went to a drive-in movie The Swinging Chandeliers. Later that same evening officer Robert Wood was shot and killed when he pulled a car matching the exact description as Harris’s over. Two witnesses-including Harris, named Adams as the murderer. Adams received a death penalty sentence that in 1979 that later was reduced to life in prison. It was early in the 1980’s when director Errol Morris happened upon Adams’s court transcripts whilst shooting a different documentary about a Dallas psychiatrist who was frequently consulted in death row cases. Convinced of Adams innocence and the false accusations made against him Morris began making a film on the subject.

    Read More

  • 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

  • Free Will in East of Eden by John Steinbeck

    1014 Words  | 3 Pages

    Timshel; meaning “thou mayest”, holds a significant role in East of Eden. It shows that anyone can desire to surmount vile in their hearts and create morality within them self. In the novel, Steinbeck portrays the significance of timshel through the introduction of free will, the internal conflict of Caleb, and the blessing of Adam.

    Read More

  • Pereboom

    1800 Words  | 4 Pages

    Human beings always believe that what they want to do is ‘up to them,' and on this account, they take the assumption that they have free will. Perhaps that is the case, but people should investigate the situation and find a real case. Most of the intuitions may be correct, but still many of them can be incorrect. There are those who are sceptical and believe that free will is a false illusion and that it only exists in the back of people’s minds, but society should be able to distinguish feelings from beliefs in order to arrive at reality and truth.

    Read More

  • Peter Van Inwagen's 'Consequence Argument'

    1133 Words  | 3 Pages

    the free will to wear an underwear as a hat in public). Also, there are laws that exist that not only restricts human’s free will but also protects humans from danger. Laws exist to ensure that people are safe because some people have misused their free will as a way to behavior both morally and immorally. Isn’t that why laws were in the first place, because people does not have a control over their actions which affects others? However, one of the consequences of one breaking the law includes prison time. Due to this consequence argument between compatibilism and determinism, we no longer have free

    Read More

  • Chisholm and Free Will

    1262 Words  | 3 Pages

    Before I begin it is pertinent to note the disparate positions on the problem of human freedom. In "Human Freedom and the Self", Roderick M. Chisholm takes the libertarian stance which is contiguous with the doctrine of incompatibility. Libertarians believe in free will and recognize that freedom and determinism are incompatible. The determinist also follow the doctrine of incompatibility, and according to Chisholm's formulation, their view is that every event involved in an act is caused by some other event. Since they adhere to this type of causality, they believe that all actions are consequential and that freedom of the will is illusory. Compatiblist deny the conflict between free will and determinism. A.J. Ayer makes a compatibilist argument in "Freedom and Necessity".

    Read More

  • Reasearch on Free Will and Determinism

    712 Words  | 2 Pages

    In life we are constantly questioning why people act the way they do. A determinist would say that freedom of choice couldn’t always be possible because our actions are determined by things that are way beyond our control. This view is known as the most extreme form of determinism; hard determinism. A hard determinist would believe there is no free will it’s an illusion everything is determined. Everything happens because of physical laws, which govern the universe. Whether or not we do well in life is far beyond our control. We may seem to have a choice but in reality we don’t. We shouldn’t blame people or praise people it wasn’t their choice. We are helpless and blind from start to finish. We don’t have any moral responsibilities. Some causes that are put forth by determinist are human nature; which means people are born with basic instincts that influence how they act. Another is environmental influence, which simply means people are shaped by their environment conditioned by their experience to be the kind of people they are. Also, social dynamics, which mean’s social creatures that are influenced by social force around them and psychological forces, which is people, are governed by psychological forces.

    Read More

  • Paul Rée's The Illusion Of Free Will

    1452 Words  | 3 Pages

    In this essay I shall argue that Paul Rée is correct in saying that free will is just an illusion. Throughout the reading entitled “The Illusion of Free Will,” Rée makes numerous great points about how we believe we have free will but we really do not. He discusses how one’s childhood upbringing determines his actions for the rest of his life, which, as a result, diminishes his freedom of will. He brings about the major issues with the common thought that since you could have acted in a different way than you actually did, you have free will. Another main argument was the proof of the reality of the law of causality, which can also be referred to as determinism.

    Read More

  • A Time to Kill

    915 Words  | 2 Pages

    Although the death penalty alone cannot bring back the life of those who have been murdered, it can serve as ultimate justice for the victims and their families. The deterrence of the death penalty can save lives. While opinions abound on both sides of the fence, in the use of the death penalty on juveniles, no one can argue with the fact that the voices of those murdered cannot be heard. Juveniles may not have fully developed brains, as Raeburn argues, but this is not an adequate excuse to dismiss the death penalty. American society cannot afford to babysit murderers, nor can they rehabilitate them. The end of the innocence begins when an innocent life is taken, and the sanctity of life is held defenseless.

    Read More

  • The Question of Free Will: Descartes, Hume, and Nietzsche

    2066 Words  | 5 Pages

    The power of acting without necessity and acting on one’s own discretions, free will still enamors debates today, as it did in the past with philosophers Nietzsche, Descartes, and Hume. There are two strong opposing views on the topic, one being determinism and the other “free will”. Determinism, or the belief a person lacks free will and all events including human actions are determined by forces outside the will of an individual contrasts the entire premise of free will. Rene Descartes formulates his philosophical work through deductive reasoning and follows his work with his system of reasoning. David Hume analyzes philosophical questions with inductive reasoning and skeptism with a strong systematic order. Neither a systematic philosopher nor a rigid thinker, Nietzsche offers his own nihilistic spin on the topic of free will. The three different approaches of free will by Nietzsche, Hume, and Descartes all obtain their strong suits as well as their pitfalls. Nietzsche insists free will is created by theologians and therefore denies its existence, while Descartes embraces free will, and Hume individualizes the meaning of free will.

    Read More

  • Compatibilism Essay

    2240 Words  | 5 Pages

    Compatabilists are the people who consider free will is compatible with determinism. They believe that if certain minimal conditions of voluntariness are met, actions of a person are freely chosen, notwithstanding that they are predetermined. They argue that even if the actions are predetermined, people are free in other ways that are enough to consider them blameworthy for their actions. Whatever the forces that determine an action (biology, social conditions, upbringing, god whatever) does not cripple our ability to act according to our free will. The compatibilist attitude is in vogue since a long time the forces that determine the action (role of determinism) have been evolving since then but the basic idea, the fact that we do a particular thing even though we don’t really choose what we want to do, we do only as we choose to do. This is put in a better way by T.M Scanlon ‘ Even If our attitudes and actions are fully explained by genetic and environmental factors, it is till true that we have these attitudes and that our actions express them.’ According to Fried this is the ‘indigestible common core of compatibilism’ that we are blameworthy for doing what we could not help but do. Fried argues that blaming a person for doing something which one cannot help his action is indigestible. Fried argues this by a hypothetical situation in which the driving force of an action is replaced by a result (which still is determinism, but of a different type). For this she gives an example of a bus driver who did his job with care and prudence but on one particular day when he is going on accustomed route. A child dar...

    Read More

  • On Free Choice of the Will

    1445 Words  | 3 Pages

    “Please tell me: isn’t God the cause of evil?” (Augustine, 1). With this question to Augustine of Hippo, Evodius begins a philosophical inquiry into nature of evil. Augustine, recently baptized by Saint Ambrose in Milan, began writing his treatise On Free Choice of the Will in 387 C.E. This work laid down the foundation for the Christian doctrine regarding the will’s role in sinning and salvation. In it, Augustine and his interlocutor investigate God’s existence and his role in creating evil. They attempt not only to understand what evil is, and the possibility of doing evil, but also to ascertain why God would let humans cause evil. Central to the premise of this entire dialogue is the concept of God, as relates to Christianity; what is God, and what traits separate Him from humans? According to Christianity, God is the creator of all things, and God is good; he is omnipotent, transcendent, all-knowing, and atemporal- not subject to change over time- a concept important to the understanding of the differences between this world and the higher, spiritual realm He presides over. God’s being is eidos, the essence which forms the basis of humans. With God defined, the core problem being investigated by Augustine and Evodius becomes clear. Augustine states the key issue that must be reconciled in his inquiry; “we believe that everything that exists comes from the one God, and yet we believe that God is not the cause of sins. What is troubling is that if you admit that sins come from… God, pretty soon you’ll be tracing those sins back to God” (Augustine, 3).

    Read More

  • Death Penalty Thesis

    800 Words  | 2 Pages

    “Since the reinstatement of the death penalty in the United States in 1976, 138 innocent men and women have been released from the death row, including some who came within minutes of execution. In Missouri, Texas and Virginia investigations have been opened to determine if those states executed innocent men. To execute an innocent person is morally reprehensible; this risk we cannot

    Read More

  • The Concept Of Free Will In The Movie Gattaca

    1385 Words  | 3 Pages

    Imagine starting your day and not having a clue of what to do, but you begin to list the different options and routes you can take to eventually get from point A to point B. In choosing from that list, there coins the term “free will”. Free will is our ability to make decisions not caused by external factors or any other impediments that can stop us to do so. Being part of the human species, we would like to believe that we have “freedom from causation” because it is part of our human nature to believe that we are independent entities and our thoughts are produced from inside of us, on our own. At the other end of the spectrum, there is determinism. Determinism explains that all of our actions are already determined by certain external causes

    Read More

  • Pro Capital Punishment Speech

    1084 Words  | 3 Pages

    It was midnight when it all happened. Tom Peterson was sleeping in bed next to his wife after a tiring day at work, while his two little daughters slept in the next room. Suddenly he was violently awakened by the terrified screams of his wife only to get a glance of a huge man standing over him with a butcher's knife. Tom was stabbed thirteen times, one of his daughters was killed and his wife was severely injured. Now, the Peterson family has just exited the supreme court of justice in which the judge has condemned the murderer of their little girl to the death penalty, for as it turns out the Peterson family had not been the first victim of this murderer.

    Read More

More about Free Will Robert Harris

Open Document