Instructions: Read The Assigned Reading From The Chapter.

Instructions read The Assigned Reading From The Chapter Thenchoose One

Instructions read the assigned reading from the chapter. Then choose ONE of the questions below to answer. Answer the question you chose in a response that is a minimum of 1-2 paragraphs. Be sure to explain your answers and give reasons for your views. You should cite the textbook and use brief quotations and summaries from the textbook in your response.

Do NOT use any other sources besides the textbook. Are you bothered by the thought of a rigidly determined existence? Does the idea that all your actions are determined disturb you-- or reassure you? How would a personal belief in determinism affect your view of crime and punishment? Do you think that people are generally responsible for their crimes, or are they not responsible due to deterministic forces beyond their control?

Do you believe that every event has a cause and that free actions are possible? If so, are these beliefs compatible? Does it matter to you whether you have free will? Would your behavior change if you believed (or didn't believe) that all your actions were determined by forces beyond your control? Are free acts, as Stace and compatibilists say, "those whose immediate causes are psychological states in the agent?" Would such acts still be free if the "psychological states" were secretly controlled by someone else through hypnosis?

Paper For Above instruction

The philosophical debate surrounding determinism and free will is one of the most enduring in human thought, directly impacting perceptions of morality, responsibility, and justice. Determinism posits that every event or state of affairs, including human actions, is determined by preceding causes. In contrast, the concept of free will argues that individuals possess the capacity to choose their actions independently of past events or causal chains. This dichotomy raises fundamental questions about human agency and moral responsibility, prompting individuals to consider how their beliefs about causality influence societal structures like criminal justice.

From a determinist perspective, the notion that all actions are caused by antecedent conditions presents a professional challenge to traditional ideas of responsibility. If, as determinists argue, every decision and action stems from prior states of mind, environment, or biological factors, then accountability becomes complex. For instance, if a crime results from ingrained psychological tendencies or genetic predispositions, assigning moral blame might seem unjustified. The textbook emphasizes that compatibilists attempt to reconcile determinism with free will by suggesting that freedom involves acting in accordance with one's psychological states without external coercion (Stace, 1960). Under this view, as long as an individual is not compelled externally, their actions can still be considered free, even if these states are internally caused.

Beliefs about free will significantly influence personal attitudes towards responsibility and societal punishment. If one perceives choices as fundamentally determined, then the justice system might focus more on rehabilitation than retribution. Conversely, belief in free will sustains the view that individuals are morally accountable, justifying punishment as a deterrent and a form of moral correction. The textbook notes that some philosophers, like Stace, argue that free acts are those initiated by one's psychological states, which are subject to internal causes but not external coercion (Stace, 1960). However, this raises further questions—if psychological states are manipulated covertly, such as through hypnosis, does this diminish the authenticity of free acts? Many argue that true freedom requires a degree of independence from external manipulations, complicating the definition of free will in human behavior (Kane, 2005).

Ultimately, whether individuals are truly free or determined influences not only philosophical debates but also practical considerations in ethics and law. A society that leans towards determinism might prioritize compassionate treatment over punishment for criminal behavior, viewing offenders as products of their circumstances. Alternatively, emphasizing free will reinforces moral responsibility and personal accountability. Recognizing the nuanced relationship between causality and agency helps foster a more comprehensive understanding of human behavior, justice, and morality. Therefore, engaging with these concepts encourages ongoing reflection on how best to structure societal responses to human actions.

References

• Kane, R. (2005). A Contemporary Introduction to Free Will. Oxford University Press.
• Stace, W. T. (1960). The Philosophy of Free Will. Macmillan.
• Pereboom, D. (2001). Living Without Free Will. Cambridge University Press.
• van Inwagen, P. (1983). An Essay on Free Will. Oxford University Press.
• Pink, S. (2011). The Philosophy of Causation. Routledge.
• Mele, A. R. (2006). Free Will and Luck. Oxford University Press.
• Frankfurt, H. (1969). Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility. The Journal of Philosophy, 66(23), 829-839.
• Frankfurt, H. (1988). The Importance of What We Care About. Cambridge University Press.
• Nahmias, E. (2006). Rational Responsibility and the Limits of Neuroscience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(4), 163-164.
• Mele, A. R. (2014). Autonomous Agents: From Free Will to Moral Responsibility. Oxford University Press.