Free Will Theory: Detterminists And Indeterminist Theory

Philosophers have developed many different theories to explain the existence and behavior of “free will.” This classical debate has created two main family trees of theories, with multiple layers and overlapping. It all begins with Determinist and Indeterminist theories. Simply put, determinists believe that our choices are determined by circumstance, and that the freedom to make our own decisions does not exist. Indeterminists, for example Libertarians, believe that we are free to make our own choices; these choices are not determined by other factors, like prior events. In class, we began the discussion of free will, and the competing arguments of Determinists and Indeterminists, with the works of Roderick Chisholm, a libertarian who made

Hard determinist view free will as incompatible with determinism, and therefore it does not exist. These philosophers, however, define free will as making decision in a random, uncaused way. B.F. Skinner would be an example of a hard determinist, where he simply does not accept the existence of freedom of will. David Hume, a 17th century philosopher, helped bring about soft determinism. He was the first to argue that maybe the root of the free will problem lied in the definition of free will. Instead of humans making decision in uncaused ways, maybe being free is doing what you want to do. By predicting what you want to do; to make you decision based on aspirations or desires, enables the concept of free will to work in the context of the determinist theory. Those who choose to accept both our choices being determined by outside factors, and accept that humans have the ability to make their own decisions based on these pressures, believe in the theory of compatibilism. Compatibilists, like A.J Ayer and Susan Wolf, define and defend their acceptance of both determinism and the existence of free will. Ayer finds two issues with “hard” compatibilism. He doubts that every event has a direct cause, which is at the core of determinism. While scientists have laws and theories that determine how actions are caused, like gravity and motion, there are still phenomena that science cannot explain their causes.

She calls her view of free will the Asymmetry of Reason View, giving people “responsibility depend(ing) on the ability to act in accordance with the True and the Good.” Wolf believes that when an individual is faced with a decision between right and wrong, if they arrive to making their choice, right or wrong, based on “psychological determination,” then that constitutes as freedom in a deterministic world. This freedom can still exist if there are no alternative decisions available, Wolf argues. In her Deep Self View, Wolf uses the source of ones decision making to determine one’s responsibility for their actions. Deep-self, or a person’s moral responsibility, is what makes one responsible for their actions. This only applies if this person’s actions, however, are “within the control” of his will, and these desires then have to be acknowledge by or “deeper” self. The acknowledgement and decision making process of acting on these desires is what makes us responsible for our actions, Wolf asserts. Sane deep-self, the way to control one’s desires of the deep-self, is proposed by Wolf after the problem of JoJo the Dictator. JoJo’s father was his role model, and when he grows knowing no other way to control his people, and uses the same methods his father used when he was dictator. Wolf believes that JoJo cant be held responsible for these terrible things because