Free Will and Determinism - Essay Example

Free Will and Determinism Even though the dilemma of free will and world determinism seems to be irresolvable, because people’s personal beliefs about the issue often don’t let them see the big picture. So it is more likely that the problem is about people’s beliefs and their unwillingness to accept any facts that contradict their assumptions on the matter. That’s why I think that the position of Compatibilists is the most comprehensive one, because in fact both statements that human beings have free will and that the world is deterministic in fact are absolutely compatible with each other (hence, I reject the third statement that claims that free will is incompatible with determinism) and multiple simple observations of this world might prove it. The position of Compatibilists, which I endorse, requires that the two statements concerning both human’s free will and the world’s determinism are truthful. Thus they both must be proven first. In order to assert that the world is deterministic and human beings live according to its rules and some either physical or metaphysical laws, we should take a look at humans’ lives and the nature itself. First of all, human beings mostly live in societies, where they are supposed to follow common rules of living and obey legal laws. These factors determine human lives on the most obvious level. We, people, have wishes and desires and most of them concern social popularity, career success, or creation of family. However, all these wishes are based on the fact that we live in society, which dictates us what we are supposed to want and establishes norms. For instance, I don’t eat insects, because in my culture, where I have been raised, eating insects it is not appropriate. This means that I am determined by my culture and society. And when I see an insect I decide not to eat it, but not because I just don’t want to do it for no reasons, but because I’ve been taught not to want it. However, some other people eat insects and they actually like it, so their culture, where everyone eats insects, determines their tastes. Considering more basic level of the world’s determination, all human beings live in the universe that works according to some universal physical laws, which are obligatory for everybody. We can’t fight natural disasters (which frequently significantly determine human lives), we can’t stop the process of dying, and we also are not able not to get down to the ground after we jumped. Thus all these physical evidences prove that there are so many forces in the universe that we can’t ignore under any circumstances ever. Human free will also works, as far as people indeed make their own decisions and they are able to change them and turn their lives around. However, in terms of human free will I’d rather be in favor of the following idea suggested by Friedrich Nietzsche, although he actually declined the typical concept of free will, still I think his definition is clear and describes my position. He said that free will means being responsible for your decisions and make changes, to be free both from anything and for something. Because “no one is responsible for man’s being there at all, for his being such-and-such, or for his being in these circumstances or in this environment. The fatality of his essence is not to be disentangled from the fatality of all that has been and will be” (Nietzsche 1954). In fact this means that even though a human being is happened to live in this world, which determines everything that happens, still the person is responsible for one’s own existence and is able to make choices and act within the scopes of all the conditions and circumstances one faces throughout one’s lifetime. Thus I believe that what we consider as freedom in fact is the necessity we are aware of. This means that freedom and the thing that we call “free will” is possible just in case we’re aware of the factors that limit us in our actions and we can chose not to follow the rules. We can eat insects once we understand that it was our society that told us not to eat them because they are disgusting, especially for eating. We also might make more global decisions and stop the determinacy of this world by voluntary dying; in this case determinism of nature embodied in the fact that human beings die under certain circumstances works along with human free will to end up life voluntary. However, I believe that the most significant argument that might be presented by Compatibilists’ opponents concerns the antinomy that lies behind the assertion that free will is the necessity that we aware of, which is Descartes’ thesis (Christofidou 2009). The point is that necessity requires absence of any freedom at all. Hence, if the world is deterministic, human intelligence that makes decisions is also a consequence of determinism and is being created by some outside factors; for instance, by brain activity and nothing else, which makes human mind a physical phenomenon. The answer of the proponent of Compatibilists would be that indeed there is a possibility that human mind might be not only a kind of brain activity but also it might result from environment and circumstances that people learn from. However, human mind is able to learn and analyze, so once a person realizes the deterministic essence of everything, one becomes able to learn how to get rid of the limits that deterministic factors place on one’s life. For instance, if a person doesn’t like the fact that society determines his life, he is free to go and become an ascetic in case he believes it would set him free; and this is how free will in fact works in deterministic world. Thus I think that free will and determinism definitely work in this world, because in fact this position meets less contradiction from both hard determinists and libertarians. The claim is the best solution for the dilemma; however, people will probably never find a common universal consensus for the problem of free will and determinism. References Christofidou, A. (2009).“Descartes on Freedom, Truth, and Goodness”. Noûs. 43, n.pag. Nietzsche, Friedrich. (1954). Twilight of the Idols, tr. Walter Kaufmann, in The Portable Nietzsche. New York: Viking Press. Read More