Chisholm's: Human Freedom And The Self
In Chisholm`s: Human Freedom and the Self, he discusses the objection of `immanent causation` which he describes as an agent causing an event. In other words, an event does nothing to cause an additional event. Instead, Chisholm argues that the agent can be a human being that causes these events. Specifically speaking, immanent causation can be something that cannot be catalysed by an event, such as the physiological activities of our brains. Physiologically speaking, the communications of neurons and the activity of neurotransmitters cannot be caused an event by the external world. However, this view goes conflicts with the idea of determinism, from which human beings are not responsible for their own actions, because of the actions
…show more content…
When she is finally evaluated by a psychiatrist, the psychiatrist concludes that Nancy has an addiction disorder, in other words, the dopamine receptors in her brain are trapped and she can only think about the rewards of drinking alcohol. Therefore, the alcoholism is not the fault of
Nancy, it is the fault of the dopamine receptors in her brain. However, objections refer to the process of transeunt causation, from which an event causes an event, rather than an agent. This argument contradicts the immanent causation argument, by asserting that instead of the brain being the cause, the human itself is the cause of the event. For example, a man moving a rock is not the will of the brain (unless you are telepathic), but the will of the hands and the arms. In that case, nothing can be moved immanently without the knowledge of the object's existence. Despite this fact, Chisholm combats this objection by stating that the brain cannot be dealt with in the way arms and hands can be. Physiological responses to objects are purely natural, and we are not immediately conscious of automatic physiological responses such as breathing or blinking.
Which in this case, we are not completely free to do what we choose, of course depending on
When she is finally evaluated by a psychiatrist, the psychiatrist concludes that Nancy has an addiction disorder, in other words, the dopamine receptors in her brain are trapped and she can only think about the rewards of drinking alcohol. Therefore, the alcoholism is not the fault of
Nancy, it is the fault of the dopamine receptors in her brain. However, objections refer to the process of transeunt causation, from which an event causes an event, rather than an agent. This argument contradicts the immanent causation argument, by asserting that instead of the brain being the cause, the human itself is the cause of the event. For example, a man moving a rock is not the will of the brain (unless you are telepathic), but the will of the hands and the arms. In that case, nothing can be moved immanently without the knowledge of the object's existence. Despite this fact, Chisholm combats this objection by stating that the brain cannot be dealt with in the way arms and hands can be. Physiological responses to objects are purely natural, and we are not immediately conscious of automatic physiological responses such as breathing or blinking.
Which in this case, we are not completely free to do what we choose, of course depending on