Free Will

Sarah Nelson

The two sides of the free will debate are the Determinists and the Libertarians. Hard determinists say that actions are effect while the real world- such as society and family- are the cause. So our actions are programmed by society and other outside or external influences and we are following a pre-programed path. While Soft determinists believe that we have some free will but it is still due to external forces. This free will differs from the Libertarians view of free will because for soft determinists we are still following our emotions which are a product of outside forces such as society. On the other side Libertarians say some of our actions are our choice and others are innate. In short it comes down to Nature vs. Nurture.

                I side with the Libertarians for when it comes down to society or life style growing up as a deciding factor on our decisions, we are taught what is right and what is wrong. However at the end of the day it is our up to us if we follow the rules set before us or not. If we look at a famous war such as the American Revolution it was started by those who chose to defy the social standards and teachings growing up. If all our actions were dictated by society there would have been no war. The typical family environment does not tend to result in people rebelling against the crown as it would have been ‘frowned upon’.  It was their own choice to stand up against the crown so those actions are therefore examples of free will. While the soft determinists would point out that those acts would be seen as acts of free will as they are aligned with the emotions and desires of those who started the American Revolution they would claim it is because of external forces that had placed those thoughts and feelings in those rebels. To which I disagree as for many of them had probably grown up in homes that were similar to what was a traditional house hold that placed emphasis on how the king was in charge etc. This would not provide a foundation for the ‘desires’ or ‘emotions’ to be placed in the people. We all have innate actions as well. They would be actions that help others in need whether they are people or animals or donating to charity. These are acts of compassion as they are impulsive and not something you debate over.  

                In terms of explanatory breadth Libertarians cover more actions. They cover rebels or those who defy societies’ rules to promote causes.  Hand in hand with that would be those who break the laws placed by society such as theft with those who are well off financially.  You make the decision to steal and as society dictates it wrong you are going against society. Then there is the reverse. You consciously make the decision to follow society’s rules and control your actions to obey the laws by not doing anything to break the laws. While Determinists cover following the laws and those who break them as society dictates to follow the laws and external forces cause you to steal but they do not cover rebels.

                For explanatory depth Libertarians  explains in more details as it explains why people act out if they have need to steal such as a desperate need for money. However it also explains why if they would steal if they were not in need of money. It covers both scenarios with more details instead of a broad reason why all actions occur. Then there are innate actions such as compassion. Libertarians would defend it as innate as we want to help and freely choose to help the needy because it helps make us feel better about ourselves. Determinists would chalk it up to society pressuring us to donate through advertisement and collecting tins.

For simplicity, the determinists view is more simplistic as it has only one cause for our actions and that is not free will. Then Libertarians are more complex with two reasons for our actions such as free will and innate actions.

For conservatism they are equal. It depends on view point of people and perhaps religious or philosophical belief. Some believe our actions are a result of society and environment which tends to provides security for them.. Others believe that we have our own choices in life and stick to that belief as they desire the feeling of being in control.

1. Libertarian and Determinist are the most plausible explanation of our actions.
2. Libertarians have more Explanatory breadth and depth while Determinists are more simplistic.
3. Therefore libertarian has the best explanation of our actions

Free will Debate 

Jaak Rakfeldt

Libertarianism is the belief that people have complete free will to do whatever they want, so due to that if they do something bad they should be held morally responsible for it. However Determinism is the complete opposite, everything is pre determined so how could anybody be held morally responsible? Compatablism and incompatablism are the midway between Libertarianism and determinism.

             I believe that Libertarianism is how things should be. First of all I just find the idea completely ridiculous that everything is set in time already, even if it was you still should be held responsible for your actions because you consciously make them. The world isn’t all planned out, people make decisions every day that shape it and mold it like a ball of clay. The saying Life is what you make it, its true, because you have the choice to do whatever you want in life, destiny doesn’t exist.

            My explanatory breath is that I do believe that Libertarianism describes human behavior much more clearly than determinism does. Determinism fails to take in account that humans have urges and tendencies to do the wrong or right thing.

My explanatory depth is that Libertarianism describes human behavior quite deeply while determinism basically says that humans have no control of their actions.  Compatablism also goes into human behavior quite a lot.

            Libertarianism and compatablism go into detail about human behavior and morals while determinism and incompatablism only generally talks on its main idea. Libertarianism is much more complicated.

            Libertarianism is how most people on the planet think, otherwise we would have no jails because the general population would think that criminals have no control of their actions.

1. Libertarianism and compatablism,  are the most plausible explanations of free will.

2. Libertarianism has much more explanatory breadth and simplicity, whereas compatablism has a little more explanatory breadth,.

3. Therefore, Libertarianism is the best explanation of free will.

Lea Clark

PHI 100 24N

Blog Post 3

            In the debate between libertarianism and determinism, Libertarians argue that some of our actions are caused by free will, while some are caused by external causes. However, determinists argue that all of our actions are caused by external causes. I think the more plausible side in this argument is libertarianism. While external forces cause some actions, they are also caused by free will. A person cannot blame all of their actions on other things; there are certain things only you can decide on and take full responsibility for.

            Libertarianism has more explanatory breadth because it better explains human behavior. Libertarians believe in people being responsible for some of their actions while determinists believe in actions being caused by free will.

            Libertarianism has more explanatory depth because it explains human behavior in greater detail. When a person is responsible for their actions, he or she must have reasoning for why they made the decisions they did.

            Determinism has more simplicity because it only gives one reason for the cause of actions while libertarianism gives more than one reason saying free will and external causes are the cause for our actions.

Conservatism can be both libertarianism and determinism. This solely depends on the person’s choice. Depending on the person they can both be a more consistent belief.

1.  Libertarianism and Determinism are the most plausible explanations of human behavior.
2.   Libertarianism has more explanatory depth and breadth while determinism has more simplicity.

3.    Therefore, libertarianism is the best explanation for human behavior.

Free Will Debate

Marissa Nicolari

Philosophy 100-24N

Rex Gililand

Blog Post 3

The free will debate has been ongoing for quite a long time. Within this debate there are two separate perspectives: libertarianism as opposed to determinism. The basic belief of libertarianism is that human beings have a free will, although all will a human has comes from the origin of a cause. Hard determinism states that all actions are caused by earlier psychological or physical events; the way of the world is set in stone and cannot be changed, therefore there is no occurrence of free will. Soft determinism, also known as compatibilism, states that all actions are caused by internal, psychological forces, allowing for free will to occur.

Out of the three theories above, I believe that soft determinism is the most plausible explanation for free will. By definition, free will is the ability to choose how to act. While this definition is very broad, I firmly believe that every human has this capability. Soft determinism takes into account that human beings have this ability to choose their actions, while also being able to understand that a person’s choices are influenced by the events that occur around them. I believe that what a person observes and experiences determines how they act and respond to events that occur around them. Libertarianism, although it does believe that humans have free will, does not believe that there is any influence or cause for one’s actions; they believe that all actions have nothing to do with predispositions or strong desires that a person has. This is why I believe that soft determinism is the most plausible to me. To further compare the three their explanatory breadth, explanatory depth, simplicity, as well as their conservatism can help show that soft determinism is the most plausible explanation.

In terms of explanatory breadth, libertarianism states that all actions a human being makes are chosen by that person and that no actions are predetermined by any form of cause or influence giving it a high amount of explanatory breadth. Hard determinism states that all things in the world are predetermined and set in stone, therefore no actions can be changed which also gives this theory a high amount of explanatory breadth. Soft determinism, like hard determinism and libertarianism, has a high amount of explanatory breadth as well because soft determinism explains that all actions come from every desire and belief that a person. Overall, all three of these concepts have the same amount of explanatory breadth.

When discussing explanatory depth, libertarianism relies on spontaneous free will, which is a concept that is elusive and mysterious. Libertarianism does not have the ability to completely explain the thought processes that occur in order for a person to come to a decision on their own actions, therefore it does not have a large amount of explanatory depth. Hard determinism, due to its theory, uses science to explain how everything in the universe is predetermined and cannot be changed. Hard determinism is very mechanical; it believes that there are laws of the universe that must be followed (certain parts of psychology and physics are two branches of science that attempt to back up hard determinism), therefore I believe that hard determinism has more explanatory breadth than libertarianism, but still not a high amount. Soft determinism has the ability to explain a person’s ability to make a choice, while also explaining why that person makes that specific choice. Soft determinism, therefore, has the most explanatory breadth out of the three because it does not leave anything to mystery.

In terms of simplicity, libertarianism is very simple. Its one assumption is that there is nothing that can influence a person’s decisions allowing for it to conclude that there is only spontaneous free will. Hard determinism is also just as simple as libertarianism; its one assumption is that everything in the world is already determined to be as it is allowing for the conclusion that there is no free will throughout the universe. Soft determinism is unlike hard determinism and libertarianism because it creates more than one assumption in order to get to its conclusion. Soft determinism assumes that free will cannot and is not spontaneous, therefore it also assumes that because free will is not spontaneous that all actions have an internal or psychological cause behind them, then it is able to conclude that there is a form of free will throughout the universe.

Lastly, in terms of conservatism, I believe that all three have the same amount. Hard determinism can be very common in scientists, as well as people who believe that everything happens for a reason not under their control. Soft determinism can be very common for people who believe that every person has a choice and must deal with the consequences that are presented due to their choice. And, I believe that libertarianism can be extremely popular with people who are impulsive. I believe all these types of people have an even representation in the world, therefore I believe that all three theories have the same amount of conservatism.

1. Soft determinism, hard determinism, and libertarianism are the most plausible explanations for free will.
2. Soft determinism has more explanatory depth and the same amount of explanatory breadth and conservatism as hard determinism and libertarianism, where as libertarianism and hard determinism both have more simplicity than soft determinism.
3. Therefore, soft determinism is the best explanation for free will.

Hunter Stokes, Free Will Debate

Blog post 3

Hunter Stokes
Philosiphy
Free Will Debate

Libertarian-ism is the belief that humans have moral responsibility because they have spontaneous free will. Spontaneous free will is the ability to control your own actions and to have the power to alter the course or path of your own life. Libertarian-ism is basically just the belief that humans have the ability to change their own life by altering their actions and reactions.
Determinism is the belief that humans lack the ability to have free will over their lives or to have any control of their future. The deterministic belief basically eliminates moral responsibility which is a very radical explanation.
I believe that the more plausible theory is the theory of Libertarian-ism because it does not eliminate moral responsibility. My belief is that you have every ounce of responsibility for your personal actions and reactions that you have. You are in control of your body and the actions it does. Moral responsibility is avoided with Determinism as a cop out in my opinion. People just want to have a reason to not be responsible for the wrongful actions that they produce and this is a perfectly good explanation to get out of being responsible.
I also think that Libertarian-ism has more explanatory breadth because of its ability to explain more human behaviors. People that believe in determinism think that they are a product of the society that they were raised in or the family that brought them up. This can not be true in all cases however because there are some people that grew up to do horrible things and had a seemingly normal childhood and young adulthood. Libertarianism is more realistic because it would explain how people who came from nothing, and a terrible society became great people, and also how people who came from normal families in safe neighborhoods became terrible people.
In the matter of explanatory depth I believe the same thing because Libertarianism just explains the actions of human beings in a better way and in more detail. Libertarianism shows that humans should feel a moral responsibility for their actions in which most cases people do feel the responsibility. There is only a certain group of people that just doesn't feel like they have the moral responsibility for their actions on their conscious. Determinism in my opinion is just a get out of jail free card like the saying " Everything happens for a reason" is.
In the case of simplicity I believe that Determinism has the upper hand because it can be generalized in the phrase that I had mentioned before, Everything happens for a reason." Determinism is simple and easy to understand because it states that there is no moral responsibility due to the fact that humans do not have free will. And free will is explained not as spontaneous activity but as the inability to create your own actions and that they are all predisposed by psychological states. Therefore humans do have 'Free Will' even though there actions are completely determined in advance.
In the aspect of conservatism I believe that determinism may be closer because almost every single person I know has used the phrase " Everything happens for a reason" and believe it or not that is a Deterministic view. People want to feel free from moral responsibility so they think that maybe there is a supernatural being that is pre-controlling or mapping out their course of action to always work out for the best, but how does this explain innocent death and wrongful punishment. Determinism is in this day I beleive a more popular belief that is easier to understand and escapes responsibility.

1. Libertarianism and Determinism are the most plausable explinations of free will and human behavior.
2. Libertarianism seems to have more explanitory breadth and depth where as Determinism has simplicity and conservitism.
3. Therefore, Libertarianism is the best explanation of Human behavior and the discussion of free will.

1. Libe

James Carrano

PHI 100 24N

Blog Post 3

2 November 2014

Libertarianism vs Determinism

There is a big difference between libertarians and determinists. Libertarians believe that people can control some of their actions through free will, while other actions are caused by the physical world around them. Hard determinists believe that free will does not exist at all. These two types of beliefs are obviously very different. There isn't anything in common between them like there was in the empiricism vs rationalism debate. I believe that libertarianism is the most plausible explanation for the cause of human actions. I believe that people choose their fate in most of the situations they’re in, but sometimes the outside world has an influence on the outcome of the situation.

Libertarianism talks more about what humans decide more than hard determinism does. It says that humans can decide some things for themselves while not deciding other things. Determinism just says that there’s no such thing as choice, and that the outside world controls everyone. I think they both talk about human behavior, but libertarianism talks more about what humans can do than not.

Libertarianism is more detailed than determinism is. Libertarianism has more rules or qualifications to it than determinism does. In determinism, everything is chosen by the physical world and there is no way humans can choose something for themselves. Determinism is very straightforward with no acceptions. Libertarianism is more detailed because it says that humans can make some choices, but sometimes can’t.

Hard determinism clearly has fewer parts than libertarianism does. Libertarianism says that sometimes humans can decide, but sometimes not, while determinism says humans can’t decide under any circumstances. You can easily see that determinism is alot more simple and easy to understand. There is much more room for error when talking about libertarianism. When deciding if someone can decide something or not, you have to think alot about it, so you don’t confuse one thing with another.

I think libertarianism keeps up with current beliefs more than determinism does. Humans usually want to be independent and make choices on their own. There are many ways that libertarianism relates to the world we live in. It relates to republicans when talking about politics. They want a government that doesn't make too many choices for them, but can make some. They usually want to make choices independently. There aren't too many people who believe that humans should not be able to make choices for themselves. Pretty much everyone wants to be able to make their own decisions.

1. Libertarianism and determinism are the best theories of causes of human behavior.
2. Determinism is less detailed whereas libertarianism has more rules or qualifications.
3. Therefore, libertarianism is the best theory for the cause of human behavior.

Melissa Tkacs

Blog Post 3

Free Will Debate

Within the debate of Libertarianism versus determinism, Libertarians believe that we have free will while determinists do not. Liberationists believe that we have free will that sprouts from two different places, spontaneous free will, which comes from our internal emotions and what we are feeling and also external free will that comes from us making decisions based on the world and what is around us.

Determinists on the other hand believe that us as humans have no free will. There are two types of determinists, however both of their ideals end up in the same reasoning that everything in our life has came preprogrammed and decided for us, basically saying that we lack any type of freedom. Regular Determinists believe exactly that; we have no choice in what is going on around us because everything happens as it is going to be planned out. Then Soft Determinists, otherwise known, as Compatibilists believe that we do have a sort of redefined meaning of free will. Their definition states that we have free will to choose what we do, but since all of our feelings and emotions are preprogrammed into our minds, that we really don’t have a choice in what we would do anyway.

I do not think that it is justified for the Soft Determinists to redefine the terms of what “free will” actually is. Free will means that we have the choice to da what we want to do when we want to do it. Furthermore also I do not think that it is plausible that we do not have free will. Not having free will takes away the morality of all situations, because if we had all of these predetermined notions in out head of what to do, why should anyone be punished for what we are doing.

I believe in the fact that all humans have free will. Although we the spontaneity of free will may seem mysterious at times, I believe that we as humans are even mysterious at times. We have all of these emotions and feelings for people and other things that happen in our lives. It would seem, as life was worthless to live if everything was already predetermined for us. Also I believe in a God whom has give us free will, the power to choose what we want to do for us. If there was no free will and one didn’t believe in a God or higher being, then who would be determining what is happening for us? Or vice versa, if there were a God who is predetermining every single move for us, why would he predetermine some of us humans not to believe in him? Or why would we be punished for doing bad things when God has already chosen them? Therefore, the way I see it is that there really is no possible way for us not to have free will.

The theory of Libertarianism has more explanatory breadth that either of the Determinist views. Libertarianism better explains where a human’s behavior would come from. The libertarian view shows that humans act because of the emotions they are feeling and the external forces that are acting on them. While the determinist view cannot account for why we would act other than us acting because we are programmed to.

The libertarian views also explain in more detail why we would act in saying that we act on our own because of our feelings and beliefs, while the Determinist view can only offer to us that we are acting because our fate is predetermined. The Determinist view fails to tell us where our actions come from and why they are predetermined.

Determinists do however have a little more simplicity on their side. However, this is only because their idea of where our actions fail to tell us anything more than just the fast that our lives are predetermined. This is simple because if one believes in this, it would be saying that our lives just simply do not mean anything because everything is already planned out for us. The determinist view by being so simple denies any purpose of life and shows that anything complex that has been accomplished was really just meaningless because everything that is still undiscovered has actually just already been discovered for us; we are just like a book waiting to be read.

The Libertarian ideals also have the most conservatism. I believe that most people agree that we have free will and reject the fact that we would in a way be a slave to the ways of thinking everything was predetermined.

1.                    Libertarianism, Determinism and Compatibilism are most plausible explanations of human behavior.

2.                    Libertarianism has much more explanatory breadth, explanatory depth and conservatism while theories Determinism and Compatibilism only have more simplicity.

3.                    Therefore, Libertarianism is the best explanation of human behavior.