Freedom

I am having trouble with the classic problem of free choice vs. determinism specifically in the sphere of human responsibility. While I often recognise that there are external factors that can and do bring people to act in various ways, I also find myself impatient with those who are unwilling to admit to a certain degree of responsibility. My problem seems to be that I recognise both not just as possible, but true simultaneously. Philosophically speaking, can this be so?

Comments

At the most general level, it is difficult to see how free will is even logically possible, whether determinism is true or not. For if determinism is true, then everything we do follows from the laws of nature plus the state of the universe before we were born; and if determinism is not true, then there is a random element to what happens. Neither of these possibilities seems to leave room for free will.

That was the bad news. The good news is that the fact that our actions have external causes is entirely compatible with their also having internal causes, in the form of our beliefs and desires. My consumption of the banana split was caused in part by the presence of that item on the menu -- an external cause -- but also by a desire on my part. If I had not had that desire, or if my desire to lose weight had been stronger, I would not have eaten the banana split. So insofar as the existence of internal causes is enough for us to hold someone responsible (as we often suppose it to be), then the existence of external causes is compatible with responsibility, since the existence of external causes is compatible with the existence of internal causes of the sort that we take to justify holding someone responsible for what they have done.

Read another response by Peter Lipton

Read another response about Freedom