Free Will, Determinism, and Compatibilism Essay Example

Introduction

Free will involves the view that a person is responsible for their behavior while according to determinist approach, all actions are caused by previous factors and therefore can be predicted. Compatibilism refers to the belief that determinism and free will are mutually attuned and that one can believe in both without being rationally conflicting. Compatibilists trust that freedom might be absent or present in situations for causes that are not related to metaphysics. The paper describes the three approaches and how they influence the actions of human beings.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Free Will

One of the significant suppositions of the humanistic approach is that people have free will and not all behavior is determined (Thorp, 2017). The humanistic term for the conduct of free will is called the personal agency, and it refers to the decisions or choices we make in life, the paths we follow and their consequences. If we need to be regarded as fully functional human beings, freedom is possible as well as a necessity. Both view self-actualization as particular human needs any motivation that differentiates us from all other species.

Therefore, it is essential to draw a line between the social and natural sciences. For instance, two chemicals reacting will always behave in the same way, and there is no sense in thinking they could respond distinctly. Nevertheless, when people relate, they could come to a compromise, agree, fall out, or even start a fight. The expectations are endless, and there is a need to understand the choice of each side of the relationship to understand their behavior (Rachels, 2011).

Conscious reflection on a person's behavior is regarded as the best way of attaining goals and learning from mistakes. Critical elements in managing the choices we make as well as aiding us to make the right decisions in precise situations are strategy, calculation, and organization. Mental illnesses or disabilities tend to weaken the concept of free will (Thorp, 2017).

To believe in the existence of free will and understand our habit, we require more than just denying that outside forces determine our actions. We need a useful account of how we make choices. If the laws of nature do not influence our decisions, then we should answer the questions: how are the actions supposed to occur? And what precisely produces our choices? We, therefore, might imagine that there is a kind of mental being inside all of us whose actions are not restricted by the laws of nature (Thorp, 2017).

The being can be considered to have a ghostly nature and makes decisions separately of the occurrences in the brain (Rachels & Rachels, 1993). However, these remarks are not plausible since they disagree with the concepts of science which tell us that there lacks evidence of any mental energy at work with us, not connected from the functions of the neurological system. It becomes hard to explain the origin of free will, who or what makes the choices for a person.

Determinism

Many approaches in psychology regard the source of determinism as being outside the person, a situation called environmental determinism. For example, children born from families with violent parents are likely to grow and become violent parents as well through imitation and observation. However, other psychologists view it from inside the individual in the form of unconscious drive or biological/genetic determinism. Behaviorists include the staunch advocates of determinism. Concepts such as "motivation" and "free will" are dismissed as delusions that disguise the causes of human behavior. We are tricked to trust that we can choose because we lack the awareness of the environmental causes of human habits. Stanley Miligram proves in his experiments in the movie "The Experimenter" that people can succumb to pressure to make certain decisions (Maher, 2015).

According to Skinner's scheme of things, the individual who engages in crime lacks real choice; he or she is forced to do so by environmental circumstances and personal history, making breaking the law inevitable and natural (Fischer, 1994). For those abiding by the law, an accumulation of reinforcers has a reverse effect. Having benefited or gotten a reward for following regulations in the past, the person does the same in the future. There is no mental evaluation or moral calculation involved, and all conduct is under stimulus control.

People who adopt a biological perspective form another group that supports determinism. Nevertheless, the process is internal forces, according to them, that determine decision making. They believe that evolution directs the behavior of a species as well as the genetic inheritance of every individual in it. For instance, a child has an inborn desire to attach to a single central attachment figure.

Determinism purports that everything that occurs must do so, given the laws of nature and the previous history of the cosmos. This aspect can be referred to as the determinism argument. However, this line of thought is confusing because of what it appears to imply personal responsibility. If people have no free will, then it could mean that they are not responsible for our actions. This determinism argument is reasonable although it can be disputed. This condition can be achieved by discussing a few responses.

Libertarianism includes the view that a few of our deeds are not enforced on us by the laws of nature, but we choose freely to do those actions (Rachels & Rachels, 1993). We could act distinctively, but we decide not to. As stated by this theory, human choices are not restricted like other events are. Many arguments came up in support of this theory. To begin with is the argument from experience which explains that we could start with the idea that individuals believe we are free since everyone is immediately aware of being free whenever they make a conscious choice.

Additionally, there is the argument that the world is not a deterministic scheme. Determinism conflicts the present-day science. In the prime of Newtonian physics, the universe was purported to function according to precise laws of cause and effect. These laws of nature were believed to identify the conditions under which state of affairs was meant to follow each other.

Besides, there is the argument that people cannot predict their own decisions. A variable case for the Libertarianism develops the idea that whatever that is causally determined is predictable. For example, if a tree in your compound is leaning, it means that after some time it will fall. However, I cannot predict the exact day or time it will fall because I do not know the laws of nature as well as everything about the tree and its physical environment.

Moreover, the argument from accountability states explains that the postulation that people have free will is deeply engrained in their regular ways of thinking (Rachels & Rachels, 1993). As they relate with other individuals, they have no option but regard them as authors of their conducts. Individuals tend to hold those they encounter responsible and blame them if they behave in a wrong way and admire them if they conduct themselves well. There is a need for free will to justify these attitudes.

Compatibilism

Compatibilism refers to the principle that free will and determinism are equally compatible and that you can believe in both without being logically inconsistent. Compatibilists think that liberty can be absent or present in situations for motives that are not related to metaphysics (Fischer, 1994). They describe free will as the freedom to act as per one's purpose without arbitrary obstruction from other people or institutions. Compatibilism involves the idea that a deed can be both determined and free at the same time. This fact seems like a contradiction, though according to the theory, it is not.

Contrary to what people might think, the idea that human behavior is free while at the same time agreeing that the laws of nature determine it is acceptable. Compatibilism often enjoys a following in philosophy. It was a hypothesis of Hobbes, Kant, Hume, and Mill in one form or another, and is protected by many writers currently (Hudson, 1994). This condition comes as a surprise to individuals who are unaware of philosophical literature because determinism and free will appear manifestly incompatible.

Some actions are free while others are not as described in the compatibilism. To understand the process you only need to find the distinction between them. For example, putting your hand over the wallet since a robber is pointing a gun at you. In this case, your actions are not of free will because you are not willing to do so (Rachels & Rachels, 1993). However, when you contribute money to a charity just because you believe that your support is helpful to the system, you are acting freely. According to compatibilism, a free deed could be predicted.

The initial concept of compatibilism can be concluded that free will is well-matched with causal determinism since free does not denote uncaused. A person is said to be free if he or she acts according to their desires or wishes (Hudson, 1994). The basic argument for compatibilism puts it that the entire worry over free will starts with the idea that conduct is part of the great causal chain, then it cannot be free. This condition means that if human behavior is like other activities, subject to preceding causes and governed by the laws of physics, then people are not more free as compared to a feather moved about by the wind (Maher, 2015).

Conclusion

Free will is majorly described by the humanistic approach which believes that the conduct of human beings is not determined. Instead, it is controlled by free will. Free will can be compared to an inner being in a person that tells them what to do and what not to. However, determinism is contradictory of free will since it believes that the cause of individuals' behavior is outsourced.Additionally, other approaches believe in a type of determinism originating inside a person, for example, the people who believe in a biological perspective of the system.

Libertarianism theory supports determinism, and it is supported by many arguments as well including the argument from experience, the case that the globe is not a deterministic scheme, people cannot predict their deeds, and the argument of accountability. Besides, compatibility deals with the principle of compatibility between free will and determinism. To understand which one of the two is behind an action, you need to find the difference in the operations.

References

Fischer, J. M. (1994). The metaphysics of free will (Vol. 1). Oxford: Blackwell.

Hudson, H. (1994). Kant's compatibilism.

Maher, B. (2015). Experimental psychology: The anatomy of obedience. Nature, 523(7561), 408.

Rachels, J. (2011). Problems from philosophy.

Rachels, J., & Rachels, S. (1993). The elements of moral philosophy (Vol. 119). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Thorp, J. (2017). Free will: A defence against neurophysiological determinism. Routledge.