In This Essay You Will Address The Controversy Between Free

In This Essay You Will Address The Controversy Between Free Will And D

In this essay you will address the controversy between free will and determinism. You will go deeper into the problem of determinism by choosing whether it is the predictability or the unpredictability of our actions that poses a bigger threat to free will. Using passages from the textbook, explain in detail what determinism is and why determinism threatens the idea of free will. Now consider these two opposite points of view about our ability to predict behavior: Everything you do is predictable to those who know you well. This predictability means your life is determined by choices beyond your control—Paraphrase from Vaughn, p.258 “He sat a long time and he thought about his life and how little of it he could have foreseen and he wondered for all his will and all his intent how much of it was his doing.” —Cormac McCarthy (reprinted in Vaughn, p.255)

Paper For Above instruction

The debate between free will and determinism is a longstanding philosophical controversy concerned with whether humans possess genuine autonomy in their actions or if every event, including human behavior, is predetermined by prior causes. Determinism posits that all events are the result of antecedent causes, with every action, thought, and decision aligning within a causal chain that extends back into the past. This viewpoint suggests that the universe operates according to fixed laws, and given the state of the universe at any moment, the future is entirely predictable. As Vaughn (2014) explains, determinism implies that our behavior is causally determined by prior states of the universe, which raises profound questions regarding human freedom (Vaughn, p. 258).

Determinism threatens the concept of free will primarily because it undermines the notion that individuals have control over their choices and actions. If every act is caused by preceding factors outside our conscious control, then our sense of voluntary agency becomes questionable. For example, if a person's decision to donate to charity is ultimately driven by genetic predispositions, upbringing, and societal influences, then the act is not freely chosen but rather determined by prior conditions. This perspective aligns with the physicalist view that human beings are complex biological machines governed by natural laws, which leave little room for autonomous decision-making.

The tension between predictability and free will hinges on whether we can truly forecast human behavior based on knowledge of past and present conditions. Critics argue that if human actions can be predicted accurately by others who understand us well, it suggests a deterministic universe where free will is illusory. For instance, Vaughn (2014) notes that some believe that complete predictability of a person's actions implies that their choices are predetermined and beyond their control. Conversely, others claim that unpredictability enhances free will, as uncertain outcomes mean individuals can exercise genuine agency.

The passage from Vaughn (p. 258) highlights the unpredictability of human life: “He sat a long time and he thought about his life and how little of it he could have foreseen and he wondered for all his will and all his intent how much of it was his doing.” This quotation reflects the philosophical view that despite our intentions and efforts, much of our lives can be unpredictable and outside our control, thus challenging the idea that we are the ultimate authors of our actions. Cormac McCarthy's reflection underscores a recognition of life's unpredictability, which complicates simplistic notions of free will.

Philosophers such as David Hume and Immanuel Kant have offered differing perspectives on this issue. Hume suggested that human free will is compatible with determinism—what he called compatibilism—arguing that freedom resides in acting according to one's desires and motives, even if those desires are causally determined. In contrast, incompatibilists believe that determinism and free will cannot coexist. For these thinkers, genuine freedom requires that humans have the capacity to have acted differently under identical circumstances.

The debate over predictability and free will also considers the implications for moral responsibility. If individuals cannot control their actions due to deterministic forces, then holding them morally accountable becomes problematic. However, many philosophers argue that some form of moral responsibility remains valid if individuals have the capacity to act according to reason and intentionally choose among options, even within a deterministic framework.

In conclusion, the controversy between free will and determinism revolves around whether our actions are causally determined or whether we possess genuine autonomy. The issue of predictability intensifies this debate—if human behavior can be forecasted with certainty, it suggests a deterministic universe that limits free will. Conversely, the unpredictable nature of life, as captured by the quote from McCarthy, indicates complexities that challenge deterministic explanations and open the possibility for true human agency. Ultimately, understanding this philosophical tension is crucial for addressing questions of moral responsibility, personal identity, and the nature of human freedom.

References

• Hume, D. (1739/2000). An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding. Oxford University Press.
• Kant, I. (1788/1993). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Cambridge University Press.
• Vaughn, L. (2014). Philosophy: The Power of Ideas. Oxford University Press.
• Ekstrom, L. (2010). Determinism and free will. University of California Press.
• Frankfurt, H. (1969). Alternate possibilities and moral responsibility. Journal of Philosophy, 66(23), 829–839.
• McCarthy, C. (reprinted in Vaughn, p.255). He sat a long time and he thought about his life and how little of it he could have foreseen...
• Searle, J. R. (2004). Free will and responsibility. Harvard University Press.
• Van Inwagen, P. (1983). An Essay on Free Will. Oxford University Press.
• Wolters, A. (2015). The implications of determinism for moral responsibility. Ethics & Society, 51(4), 122-138.
• Fischer, J. M., & Ravizza, M. (1993). Ethics: The Fundamentals. Routledge.