Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

Consider the View That Free Will is an Illusion

Good Essays
1222 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Consider the View That Free Will is an Illusion
Consider the view that free will is an illusion (30 marks)
You decide on the chocolate cake confident that you could have chosen the sandwich instead. You were free to do both, but as a matter of fact, you chose to eat the unhealthy option. But were you actually free to choose the unchosen alternative? Many philosophers think that free will is actually an illusion – that the choice you actually made was inevitable. Schopenhauer, for example, argued that for a man to say that he could have chosen an alternative is analogous to water in a still pond saying it could be flowing. Yes, he said, the water could be flowing if that same water were in a river, but given that it is actually in a pond its stillness is inevitable. I will argue that the arguments that purport to show that free will is an illusion are weak, and that we have such a thing as free will.
First let us look at the arguments for determinism (here I will understand the determinism being discussed to be hard determinism – the view that our free will is illusory – rather than the compatibilist idea that free will can exist alongside causal determinism). What makes you take the chocolate cake instead of the sandwich? We think that the chocolate taking is the result of our deliberation and that the motive for eating the chocolate cake overcame our desire to be healthy. But what determined or caused us to be the kind of being that preferred the one to the other? It was our overall character. But what caused this? We say it is our upbringing and our genes. Now did we decide upon our upbringing that started the casual chain of events that culminated in the taking of the chocolate? No, so there was no other action that was in fact possible. Think of a snooker ball falling into the pocket. What caused this to happen? It was the combination of its shape, the direction of the cue, and the nature of the table. These factors combined with the laws of physics made the event inevitable. Of course, the snooker ball was not logically required to go into the pocket. There could have been a gust a wind at the crucial moment, but then this other event would have been causally necessary. Other things can only happen if other things which cause these other things to happen occur. So whatever happens is determined.
If this is true of snooker balls, why should it be not true of us as well? If we are physical beings, and our brains composed of physical stuff, why should I be not constrained by the same physical forces as everything else? The hard determinist says that there is no reason to believe that we are not subject, like the billiard ball, to the laws of nature. We feel like we could have chosen the sandwich, but given the physical facts about the situation the taking of the chocolate was inevitable. Of course, we could have taken the sandwich if the physical facts were different, but they weren’t! So free will – the sense that we could have done otherwise in the same situation – is an illusion say the hard determinists. We are not free.
This is a radical thesis, and if accepted would result in a radical readjustment of our concept of ourselves. And it from this that my first argument comes. According to phenomenalism we should proceed according to this methodology: accept the appearances – accept what you have the most warrant for believing. Descartes, for example, says we can be more philosophically assured of the existence of our own minds than the existence of the physical world. Hence his famous proposition: Cogito ergo sum. Why should the more doubtful propositions of science about the nature of the doubtable physical world take precedence over the immediate data of consciousness? Why should the philosophically disputable over-ride the philosophically indubitable? Physical determinists are committed to this doubtful methodology: let the world, which we cannot prove to exist, take precedence over the mental world whose existence we simply cannot doubt. The phenomenalist like Sartre says the mental appearances are indisputable. We certainly have the phenomenology of the appearance that we could have chosen otherwise. And it is from these certainties that we should proceed. So our freedom is here an inevitable part of our conception of ourselves and no argument from the outside world of physics can over-ride these certainties.
Here’s another argument against the acceptance of the idea that free will is an illusion. Kant says that ought implies can. In other words, we cannot be obliged to do something if it is not within our ability to do it. Someone may say that I ought to eliminate third world poverty – that if I do not do so I am guilty of a neglect of duty. But this is unreasonable. It is not within my power to eliminate third world poverty, so it cannot be said that I ought to do so. Of course, if someone were to say that I ought to help to eliminate third world poverty, this is a reasonable ‘ought’ because I can do it. Ought then implies can. The argument proceeds from this presupposition and says that if Eric murders Sam we say that he ought not to have done so. He ought to have done differently – he ought to have refrained from murder. But if determinism is true, then, Eric had no alternative open to him. He was caused by his nature, the laws of physics, and his environment to kill Sam. We cannot therefore say that he ought not to have done it. We cannot expect people to do things that are not within their power to do. Our moral beliefs then presuppose that determinism is false. If we are not free then a morality of oughts and duty is incoherent. Again, we could proceed phenomenologically on this – we are more sure and have more warrant for our oughts than we have for our beliefs in determinism, so moral oughts should over-ride any belief we might be entertaining for determinism.
Another argument against determinism says this: if I am caused to inevitably accept the conclusions of an argument then I cannot have been rational to accept the conclusions of the argument. If I am determinist I have to say that my belief in determinism was caused by physical processes. The determinist has to accept that it is true for his opponent. Both are caused by ignorant physical forces to accept their beliefs. But this is self-refuting. The determinist is in effect saying that there is no rationality, so we cannot be rational in accepting or rejecting beliefs. So the consistent determinist cannot say that he is offering reasons for accepting determinism; he must say he is putting in new causal inputs that cause a new belief state to emerge. This seems little better than irrational brain-washing!
To conclude: belief in determinism is not warranted. It goes against our fundamental conceptions of ourselves and threatens to make morality meaningless. Moreover, determinism is self-refuting. It says of itself ‘There is no rational reason for accepting me.’ I cannot rationally accept that which has no rational reason for its justification.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    Three Faces of Psychology

    • 380 Words
    • 2 Pages

    You may think your choice of chili and ice cream for lunch was freely made, but your perception of free choice is an illusion. Choosing chili and ice cream is predictable from the consequences of past behavior.…

    • 380 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Arguments about free will are mostly semantic arguments about definitions. Most experts who deny free will are arguing against peculiar, unscientific versions of the idea, such as that free will means that causality is not involved. These arguments leave untouched the meaning of free will that most people understand which is consciously making choices about what to do in the absence of external coercion, and accepting responsibility for one’s actions. Hardly anyone denies that people engage in logical reasoning and self-control to make…

    • 890 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    vHarry Frankfurt’s work “Freedom of the Will and the Concept of a Person” discusses the attributes of free will through the concept of first and second order desires. He explains that a first-order desire is a desire to perform an action, and a second-order desire is the desire to perform another desire. When someone wants their secondary desire to become their will and take the place of their first-order desire it is called a second-order volition. Frankfurt’s work centers on how second-order volitions are evidence of free will because free will is only achieved when a person is able to choose which desire to act upon. Frankfurt argues that each second-order volition is an expression of free will and without them a person is left with only…

    • 1281 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Stan Lee, creator of many of the Marvel movies, once said, “With great power there must also come… great responsibility.” Free will is like a great power that has been given to us. It can be used for good and evil. As humans, we believe that we have a choice in everything. Thus the idea of free will. But because of that choice there will always be a downside to free will.…

    • 406 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The excerpt I chose was “Free Will versus Determinism”, and I noticed from the beginning the piece was written with reasons to support the content. First, the presentation introduces two beliefs; the behavior of atoms is governed entirely by physical law, and humans have free will. Immediately after presenting these ideas and questioning the relations in the two, the excerpt explains the logical approach to why they do not necessarily favor one another. Any argument that is presented, or comparison of two aspects, needs facts and reasons to confirm why the person is trying to convince the reader or other person that the argument is supported.…

    • 462 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    I shall first briefly define determinism. Determinism means that for every event that takes place, the preceding events are determined. Given prior events and the laws of nature, it had to happen in that way and no other way.…

    • 819 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Hard Determinist argument appears to be in conflict with whether we act freely rather than “free will” or our ability to make choices. Using a thought experiment I will attempt to explain the different between acting freely…

    • 1167 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Free Will and Determinisim

    • 1135 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Cahn’s article offers examples of specific types or versions of determinism. One particular view of determinism is known as “hard determinism.” Hard determinism assumes that determinism is true and, therefore, free will does not exist. While human beings actions are not absolutely predictable, hard determinism explains that, “each individual is influenced by a unique combination of hereditary and environmental factors” (Cahn…

    • 1135 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    “The determinist view of human freedom is typically based off of the scientific model of the physical universe” (Chaffee, 2013, p. 176). They believe that since events in the physical universe as well as the biological realm consistently display casual connections, and because humans are a part of the physical universe and biological realm, it is a reasonable assumption that all of our actions (and the choices that initiated the actions) are also casually determined, eliminating the possibility of free choice ( Chaffee, 2013, p. 176). Although, this doesn’t take into account the complex…

    • 2349 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thomas Nagel, Free Will

    • 550 Words
    • 3 Pages

    One case Thomas Nagel presents about free will is shown using a cake and peach example. He starts it off by saying that you are in a cafeteria line and choose to take a piece of chocolate cake instead of a peach. Before you made up your mind on which food item you were going to grab, it was completely open whether you would take the fruit or the dessert. It was then only your choice that decided which it would be and you could have chosen a peach even if everything else had been exactly the same as it was up until that point in your life when in fact you chose the cake. Because of this, nothing would have had to be different for you to have chosen the peach, besides simply your choice. Because of this, it was not determined in advance and determinism is therefore false. Nagel also adds that some things in this world are actually determined in advance, such as the sun rising tomorrow at a specific hour and that is not an open possibility, but your choice regarding which food item to eat was not inevitable or determined in advance. You chose the cake simply because you wanted the cake more than you wanted a peach and “there were no processes or forces at work before you made your choice that made it inevitable that you would choose the chocolate cake” (Nagel 162). The desire for cake was purely stronger than the negative consequence of gaining weight.…

    • 550 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Its our destiny predetermines? Do we have a choice? Did we ever have a choice? According to Thomas nagel on his book “what does it all mean?” There is a specific chapter dedicated to “Free will” in which nagel himself lays out a situation about the choice of a peach and a chocolate cake piece. He’s describing the situation and the dilemma between both choices. despite the fact that you thought you had a choice, that you could have the peach if you want but you made the decision that you’d rather have a piece of chocolate when it was determined all along that you in fact were going to have chocolate cake and not have the peach. It doesn’t matter how long it took…

    • 2220 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Free Will Philosophy

    • 334 Words
    • 2 Pages

    I strongly believe that W.T. Stace is correct while arguing for the view of soft determinism, also known as compatibilism. Stace believes in compatibilism, which states that determinism is true, but free will still does exist. He puts both views together by studying the definition of free will.…

    • 334 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Paradox Of Free Will

    • 1320 Words
    • 6 Pages

    In the third perek of Pirkei Avos (Ethics of the Fathers), the mishna states, “הַכֹּל צָפוּי, וְהָרְשׁוּת נְתוּנָה” – “Everything is foreseen, and free will is given.” Most commentaries understand this mishna to be referring to the philosophical paradox of free will and divine foreknowledge.…

    • 1320 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Another article, “Is Free Will an Illusion? Scientists, Philosophers Forced to Differ”, by Natalie Wolchover agrees that free will does not exist. The article argues that free will is nothing more than electrical impulses in our brain. This electrical activity happens before we make the decision, not during or after. Humans have no control over these impulses.…

    • 630 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    FREE WILL AND DETERMINISM In general, Free Will (“Free Will”) is a concept which state that human beings are the sole makers of their activities and to dismiss the idea that human choices are predetermined. However, Determinism (“Determinism”) is a theory which states that all events including human activities and decisions are completely determined by past events, and humans do not have any free will. ROBERT BLATCHFORD – THE DELUSION OF FREE WILL Free will has been a resistance in the way of human ideas for thousands of years. According to Blatchford, free will means one is “free of all control or interference: that it can overrule heredity and environment”.…

    • 566 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays