'Only Hard Determinism is justifiable' Discuss. Determinism is the idea that all actions are governed by laws outside of one’s control. Some philosophers believer that one’s ability to make free choices is an illusion whereas, others state that there is something else beyond understanding that may cause one’s actions to be determined. There are a variety of theories which are response to dealing with debate about free will and determinism. Hard determinism is the theory that human behaviour and actions are wholly determined by external factors, and therefore humans do not have genuine free will or ethical accountability.
In total opposition to this belief is determinism, the theory that all behaviour is pre-ordained and we cannot chose our destiny so to speak. This idea can be most clearly seen in psychological approaches such as the biological or the behaviourist. Other approaches such as the cognitive approach present the idea of soft determinism, the suggestion that whilst some behaviour is determined we still have some degree of control and choice over what we do. The most firm believers in free will are humanistic psychologists. The humanistic approach has been praised for its great emphasis on autonomy, the idea that we have control over everything we do.
Kant argues that any action cannot be moral unless the motives are moral. For each of these philosophies, the question of living the "good life" is an intricate part of the belief system. For the Utilitarians, living a life that benefited as many people as possible, in essence, a life that caused the greatest widespread good results would be considered a life of virtue. For Kant, the only moral action is one that is done entirely because of obligation. He also makes the distinction between motives, saying that an action can be "in accord with duty" and still be immoral.
To what extent is it fair to say that our behaviour is determined? Determinists believe that everything in the universe including human actions and choices have prior causes and are consequences of various external factors that are beyond our control. This concept was referred to by the ancient Greeks as ‘Fatalism’ in which people are the victims of fate and circumstance. All theories of determinism are influenced by Newtonian concepts that the universe is governed by immutable laws of nature such as gravity. Hard determinists take a strict position, likening humans to machines and having the view that we are not free or responsible for our actions as freedom is simply an illusion.
But unlike earlier philosophers, such as Socrates who were concerned with how to live a good/ethical life, and famously said ‘the unexamined life is hardly worth living’, both Nietzsche and Sartre are concerned with being and existence. The first and most important tenet of Existentialist thought is that Man Is Free. Nietzsche believed that the ‘will to power’, was the primary drive and the source of all creative activity and the key to human freedom. It was the all-important way to achieve freedom of the individual and that absolute objective truth of the world was an illusion and our search for such a truth is bred from fear. While having much in common with Nietzsche, both are atheistic existentialists, Sartre proposed that man is nothing but what he makes of himself and therefore by taking responsibility for his actions he can change his life and create a new Man.
THE ILUSION OF FREE WILL Through out history there have been numerous philosophers who support different positions in the problem of free will. The difficulty of free will is whether, and in what sense, rational agents exercise control over their actions and decisions. There are 3 mail positions, libertarianism, soft determinism and hard determinism. Liberalists believe that men’s decisions are made by our own thinking and they are a result of a rational agency. Soft determinists believe that determinism, witch according to their believe is compatible with free will and responsibility, is true.
The conflicting philosophical idea of “free will” is determinism, wherein supporters of this thesis believe that everything on earth (as well as the metaphysical) is predestined. For the proponents of metaphysical libertarianism, they believe that determinism is just a fiction of the mind, and that free will does exist (or to such a point). On the other hand, those who oppose this thought are called hard determinists, in which they claim that the idea of determinism is true and that people do not have free will. But of all the debates related to free will vs. determinsim, the argument on existence vs. essence is perhaps the most prevalent one. Essentialism, a philosophical thought that seems to favour the religious ones, believe that every phenomenon here on Earth follows a pattern and that the events (and the outcomes of it) are predictable.
Instead of having your own thoughts and own free will do what what you want, you're forced to believe what society wants to believe. You believe it as well. These words are so deeply rooted in everyone's thoughts that they have no choice but to live by it, which is another display of society taking away choice and
If determinism is true, then we don’t have free will. Discuss. It can be argued that if determinism is true, then we do not have free will. However, this argument really depends on which stream of determinism is being referred to. The argument that supports this idea the most is the fatalism argument - the idea that everything is predetermined before we are born and our actions do not affect this.
Augustine is considered a deep-self compatibilist who believes that if we act according to our will and not just our desires we can have free will. He also believes that God allows for free will as a means of explaining why evil is present in our world. All ideas on free will and determinism can be related to today’s society and how we function. “In general we can say that having freewill means that we can make choices in our lives and that these choices are up to us.” (Rauhut 77) If we have the ability to make decisions and shape our futures we ultimately have freewill then “why do philosophers worry about freewill” (Rauhut 78). Philosophers question freewill based on the idea