Posted: February 4th, 2022

The Debate Between Freewill And Determinism

The Debate Between Freewill And Determinism
The discussion between freewill and determinism has been continuing for centuries. It began in ancient Greek and progressed during the Roman Empire. Many people try to figure out the root cause of the behaviors of individuals. Freewill believes that people make choices out of their own will. According to determinism, people exhibit specific actions due to influence by external forces that they cannot control. For instance, people believed that the gods were behind some acts.
Various authors and scholars have argued in favor of the freewill. According to Peter Van Inwagen, determinism does not exist as it is incompatible with moral responsibility and freewill. Freewill allows people to be accountable for their actions. That is why society encourages responsibility and accountability for people’s actions. Knowledge about cognitive sciences reveals that the brain is more inclined to determinism.
The discussion about freewill and determinism would be more relevant; if we rephrased the question and asked whether freewill or determinism is relevant to us? Both freewill and determinism have consequences. Individuals who blame outside forces, such as politics, status, the media, or even genes for their actions, may end up in a state of defeatism.
Freewill has both positive and negative consequences. Those who use it moderately can achieve their goals, while those who exaggerate inspiration can end up frustrated. It is good to believe that we are accountable for being successful in our careers and relationships. However, overdoing it and experiencing failure, which is part of life, can lead to frustrations.
Determining whether outside forces or freewill is responsible for various actions has been a challenging issue that most philosophers and psychologists are yet to iron out. Ancient philosophers of the Stoic School believed that we will always hover around freewill and determinism. They deemed it crucial for persons to figure out what they identify with so that they become calmer and fulfilled.
Philosophers who argued in support of freewill include; Daniel Dennet, Robert Kane, and Sam Harns. Galen Strawson argues that free will is present, but it is impossible. As a person acts, they are speaking what is in their mind. He believes that free will calls for moral responsibility. For a choice to be morally responsible, it must have some other reasons, and thus free will alone is not possible. Alfred Mele argues against Strawson’s idea. He believes that Strawson misunderstood freedom and moral responsibility.

References
Van Inwagen, Peter. “The incompatibility of free will and determinism.” Philosophical Studies 27.3 (1975): 185-199.
Sappington, A. A. “Recent psychological approaches to the free will versus determinism issue.” Psychological Bulletin 108.1 (1990): 19.

Order | Check Discount

Tags: The Debate Between Freewill And Determinism