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.