Argument for Soft Determinism

614 Words3 Pages
Frankfurt’s Argument for Soft Determinism One has free will only if one is free to will what one wants to will One may be free to will what one wants to will but not be free to want that which she wants So one may have free will yet not be free to want what one wants Explain Free Will is when a person is free and morally responsible for his actions, then he could of acted otherwise. Frankfurt also calls this the Principles of Alternative Possibilities but he believes it is false so he provides a counter-argument for someone that lacked alternative possibilities but was still morally responsible. Suppose an Assassin intends to shoot the Victim. A Brainwasher is on the standby to ensure that if the Assassin doesn't follow through, the Brainwasher will manipulate the Assassin to shoot the victim. Frankfurt offers a new conception of free will that is compatible with Determinism. To understand his view, we need to define some of the terms he uses. A first order desire is a desire to do something. A desire to eat a cookie. A will would be a first order desire that is effective in leading to action. A desire to eat a cookie is one's will if that desire brings one to eat a cookie. A second-order desire is a desire to have a certain desire. A desire that one should desire to work out rather than eating a cookie. A second-order violation is a desire that a first order desire would be one's will. If I desire, not just a desire to work out but that desire to work out rather than eat a cookie be effective in bringing one to workout rather than eat a cookie. It is in having second-order volitions that Frankfurt regards as essential to being a person. A wanton is an agent without a second order volitions. They are beings with first order desires but they don't care about their desires. He mentions three types of addict; The Wanton, The Unwilling, and The
Open Document