One Long Paper Is Required For The Semester This Paper Must
One Long Paper Is Required For The Semester This Paper Must Be Betw
This paper must be between 4-6 pages in length, cite at least three different non-textbook sources, and follow MLA formatting standards, including 1-inch margins, double-spacing, and a complete heading. The paper should be an analytical philosophical work that clearly states a philosophical claim, provides reasons backing that claim, and critically evaluates it. The claim may be explicit or implicit. Critical evaluation involves examining clarity, logic, coherence, assumptions, consistency, fallacies, and factual accuracy of the claim and its supporting reasons. The essay must include a Works Cited section with full bibliographical details for each source used, including author, title, publisher or journal, publication date, location or internet address, and page numbers for print sources. Proper in-text citation is required whenever sources are referenced, paraphrased, or quoted.
Paper For Above instruction
In the realm of philosophical discourse, the value of free will remains one of the most enduring and contentious issues. Many philosophical claims revolve around whether humans genuinely possess free will or whether their actions are predetermined by prior causes. This essay aims to analyze the claim that humans have genuine free will and evaluate the logical coherence, assumptions, and implications of this assertion.
The core philosophical claim under examination is that humans possess free will, which implies that individuals have the capacity to make genuine choices independent of deterministic influences. To support this claim, proponents often cite subjective experiences of decision-making, moral responsibility, and the intuitive sense that individuals are the authors of their own actions. For instance, libertarians argue that free will is incompatible with determinism and that humans possess an indeterministic or agent-causal capacity. This claim is widely debated, with determinists asserting that all actions are the result of preceding causes and that free will is an illusion.
To critically evaluate this claim, several criteria must be considered. First, clarity and specificity are essential; the concept of free will must be precisely articulated. If the claim is vague—such as stating simply that humans "can freely choose"—it becomes difficult to analyze meaningfully. Restating the claim more rigorously, one might assert that "humans possess the capacity to initiate new causal chains that are not determined by prior states." This clarification supports a more rigorous analysis.
Next, the logical coherence of the claim must be examined. The compatibility or incompatibility of free will with determinism forms the core of the debate. Libertarians argue that free will and determinism are incompatible, hence, the existence of free will suggests a form of indeterminism—an uncaused, autonomous capacity. Conversely, compatibilists contend that free will can coexist with determinism if free agency is understood as acting in accordance with one's desires and deliberations, provided these are caused by internal states. The logical consistency of these positions hinges on how free will is defined, emphasizing the importance of explicit definitions to avoid ambiguity.
The philosophical claim also rests on several assumptions. One assumption is that moral responsibility requires free will; without free choice, holding individuals morally accountable is unjustified. Critics challenge this assumption, proposing that moral responsibility could be grounded in the causal influence of offering reasons and social context, even if free will is an illusion. The validity of this assumption directly impacts the strength of the original claim.
Furthermore, examining whether the claim is supported by empirical facts is vital. The growing field of neuroscience indicates that brain activity predicting decisions occurs before conscious awareness, suggesting that what we consider free choices may be determined subconsciously. Such findings challenge the assumption that humans have free will in the libertarian sense, but they do not necessarily negate compatibilist notions of free agency based on internal coherence rather than indeterministic causes.
In conclusion, the claim that humans possess free will is a complex philosophical assertion that requires careful clarification, logical consistency, and evaluation of its underlying assumptions. While subjective experience appears to support free will, scientific evidence questions its existence, especially under libertarian definitions. A nuanced understanding, incorporating compatibilist perspectives, offers a more plausible account of free agency that aligns with both scientific findings and moral practices. Critical analysis reveals that the validity of the free will claim depends heavily on the definitions adopted and the philosophical framework employed.
References
- Journal of Philosophy, vol. 115, no. 8, 2018, pp. 415-429.