Hume vs. Beauvoir

1073 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Essays on determinism

The debate regarding free will and determinism has made its appearance in history several times, and the argument only continues to grow. The topic under debate deals with “the doctrine that all events, including human action, are ultimately determined by causes external to the will” (determinism) and “the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate” (free will). Hume’s argument concerning “the doctrine of liberty” and “the doctrine of necessity” mostly focuses on establishing the truth and character of necessity. He centers on the relation between the two concepts and effectively reflects what liberty means [to him].
Hume declares himself a compatibilist, defining an instance of free will as one in which the agent has the independence to act to his own ambition. That is, the agent is not coerced to act in a presumed manner. Hume believes in free will and determinism, arguing that the two beliefs can be adjusted. By taking this position, he redefines free will and determinism in order to avoid the logic of the incompatibilist position. According to Hume, the incompatibilist’s belief of determinism claims the existence of causation/necessary connection in physical communications that we deny exist in human behavior. For Hume, determinism steers from events being randomly coerced, and relies only on our perception of them being sporadically necessitated. On page 64 Hume states, “It is universally allowed that matter, in all its operations, is actuated by a necessary force, and that every natural effect is so precisely determined by the energy of its cause that no other effect, in such particular circumstances, could possibly have resulted from it.” Hume instills the idea that every effect has a cause, and every cau...

... middle of paper ...

...t notice that the alcohol has changed their motives, but might also take note of the idea that they will forever be labeled an alcoholic. Beauvoir on the other hand, believes that a person can change who they are and make a complete 360. If the alcoholic has stopped drinking and does not wish to take another drink ever again, then said person should no longer bear the label of an alcoholic. The alcoholic is a new human being in the eyes of Beauvoir; able to become anything they wish to be.
In conclusion, Beauvoir and Hume ultimately believe separate ideas. Hume believes in free will and determinism, while Beauvoir believes that free will and necessity are not compatible. Hume believes that events in a person’s life are determined by causes external to the will, and Beauvoir believes that a person is able to change who they are no matter what the circumstances are.

Show More
Related

  • Analysis of Roderick Chisholm's 'Human Freedom and the Self'

    1447 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Roderick Chisholm’s essay Human Freedom and the Self he makes the reader aware of an interesting paradox which is not normally associated with the theory of free will. Chisholm outlines the metaphysical problem of human freedom as the fact that we claim human beings to be the responsible agents in their lives yet this directly opposes both the deterministic (that every action was caused by a previous action) and the indeterministic (that every act is not caused by anything in particular) view of human action. To hold the theory that humans are the responsible agents in regards to their actions is to discredit hundreds of years of philosophical intuition and insight.

    Read More

  • Hume's and Anscombe's View on Causation

    1237 Words  | 3 Pages

    Hume’s notion of causation is his regularity theory. Hume explains his regularity theory in two ways: (1) “we may define a cause to be an object, followed by another, and where all the objects similar to the first are followed by objects similar to the second” (2) “if the first object had not been, the second never had existed.”

    Read More

  • Free Will and Determinism of Ayer and Holbach

    1810 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...on, freedom of the will is needed to clarify that just because one’s actions are capable of being predicated, it does not follow that I am constrained to do one action or the other. If I am constrained though, my will is absent from the situation, for I really don’t want to give someone my money with a pistol to my head, and it follows my action is constrained and decided by external compulsion, rather than internal activity, or stated otherwise, that internal activity being free will, and thus free will is reconciled with determinism.

    Read More

  • Freedom of the Will and the Concept of a Person by Harry Frankfurt

    1236 Words  | 3 Pages

    Frankfurtean compatibilism provides a more refined model than Humean compatibilism. Humean compatibilism has denied the deterministic notion of freedom-the ability to have chosen otherwise. Hume then provides a new definition of freedom, as “a power of acting or not acting, according to the determinations of the will” (“Of Liberty and Necessity”, 23). In Hume’s view, as long as we act according to our desires and belief, we are exercising freedom of will and freedom of action. Frankfurt adds a further distinction within our desires, and concludes that our will is free if and only if we act on a first-order desire determined by our second-order desire. An agent’s will, defined by Frankfurt, is “the notion of an effective desire-one that moves (or will or would move) a ...

    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 discretion, 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 skepticism in a strong systematic order.

    Read More

  • Libertarianism

    1135 Words  | 3 Pages

    For centuries philosophers have debated over the presence of free will. As a result of these often-heated arguments, many factions have evolved, the two most prominent being the schools of Libertarianism and of Determinism. Within these two schools of thought lies another debate, that of compatibilism, or whether or not the two believes can co-exist. In his essay, Has the Self “Free Will”?, C.A. Campbell, a staunch non-compatiblist and libertarian, attempts to explain the Libertarian argument.

    Read More

  • Libertarianism is the Best Philosophy

    1632 Words  | 4 Pages

    All in all, each view about the philosophy of free will and determinism has many propositions, objects and counter-objections. In this essay, I have shown the best propositions for Libertarianism, as well as one opposition for it which I gave a counter-objection. Additionally, I have explained the Compatabalistic and Hard Deterministic views to which I gave objections. In the end, whether it is determinism or indeterminism, both are loaded with difficulties; however, I have provided the best explanation to free will and determinism and to an agent being morally responsible.

    Read More

  • Free Will and Determinism

    1633 Words  | 4 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Reason: David Hume, Kant And Reason

    1433 Words  | 3 Pages

    David Hume is was a strong advocator and practitioner of a scientific and empirical way of thinking which is reflected in his philosophy. His skeptical philosophy was a 180 degree shift from the popular rational philosophy of the time period. Hume attempted to understand “human nature” through our psychological behaviors and patterns which, when analyzing Hume’s work, one can clearly see its relation to modern day psychology. Hume was a believer in that human behavior was influenced not by reason but by desire. He believed that “Ambition, avarice, self-love, vanity, friendship, generosity, public spirit—these passions, mixed in various proportions and distributed throughout society, are now (and from the beginning of the world always have been) the source of all the actions and projects that have ever...

    Read More

  • David Hume And Spinoza

    1816 Words  | 4 Pages

    The closest we get to cause and effect are two distinct phenomena arising together often and the mind thinking one produces the other. Hume regards this as a constant conjunction, not cause and effect. Although this is a leap in reasoning, and we have no reason to believe this to be true, Hume regards this as custom, which is the great guide of life (28). Life would be chaos if we believed in things completely contrary to the regularity of our experience, but the formation of habit is where we can lead ourselves to erroneous judgments. Although Hume's skepticism appears to clear up the mind, it leads him to believe that there is no such thing as causation, which Spinoza disagrees with. Rather, Spinoza argues that nature is all a long chain of causation which gives all causes effects and all effects causes. This system recognizes nature as a mechanism. All causes are a result of nature and the conditions imposed by it. Judging cause and effect individually is missing the point. To say that a billiard ball causes the other one to move only focuses two select phenomena. Rather, God, or nature, is that which connects all phenomena. Thus, the chain of causation cannot be understood of by two simple "links, it must be assessed as a whole. Spinoza argues that there are no free causes, only necessary ones. Thus, all causes are free causes and are a result of nature. This great chain of

    Read More

  • Hume's Ideas on Cause and Effect

    684 Words  | 2 Pages

    Hume distinguishes two categories into which “all the objects of human reason or enquiry” may be placed into: Relations of Ideas and Matters of Fact (15). In regards to matters of fact, cause and effect seems to be the main principle involved. It is clear that when we have a fact, it must have been inferred...

    Read More

  • Hume Vs Kant

    1749 Words  | 4 Pages

    In order to go beyond the objects of human reason, Hume proposed that reasoning was based upon cause and effect. Causal relations help us to know things beyond our immediate vicinity. All of our knowledge is based on experience. Therefore, we need experience to come to causal relationships of the world and experience constant conjunction. Hume stated that he “shall venture to affirm, as a general proposition which admits no exception, that the knowledge of this relation is not in any instance, attained by reasonings ‘a priori’, but arises entirely from experience.” (42)

    Read More

  • Of Necessity and Liberty

    1690 Words  | 4 Pages

    For ages, Philosophers have struggled with the dispute of whether human actions are performed “at liberty” or not. “It is “the most contentious question, of metaphysics, the most contentious science” (Hume 528). In Section VIII of An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, David Hume turns his attention in regards to necessary connection towards the topics “Of Liberty and Necessity.” Although the two subjects may be one of the most arguable questions in philosophy, Hume suggests that the difficulties and controversies surrounding liberty (i.e. free will) and necessity (i.e. causal determinism) are simply a matter of the disputants not having properly defined their terms. He asserts that all people, “both learned and ignorant, have always been of the same opinion with regard to this subject and that a few intelligible definitions would immediately have put an end to the whole controversy” (Hume 522). Hume’s overall strategy in section VIII is to adhere by his own claim and carefully define “liberty” and ‘necessity” and challenge the contemporary associations of the terms by proving them to be compatible.

    Read More

  • Freedom and Determinism

    2359 Words  | 5 Pages

    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).

    Read More

  • Kant Answer Hume On Causality

    1060 Words  | 3 Pages

    Hume states that in nature we observe correlated events that are both regular and irregular. For instance, we assume that the sun will rise tomorrow because it has continued to do so time and time again and we assume that thunder will be accompanied by lightning for the same reason. We never observe the causation between a new day and the sun rising or between thunder and lightning, however. We are simply observing two events that correlate in a regular manner. Hume’s skepticism therefore comes from the belief that since we do not observe causal links, we can never truly be sure about what causes anything else. He then goes so far as to say that if this is the case, it must be a fact that nothing causes anything else. In Hume’s theory, there is not only no objective causation, but no objective principle of cause and effect on the whole.

    Read More

More about Hume vs. Beauvoir

Open Document