Free Will and Moral Responsibility - Essay Example

Determinism, free will and moral responsibility (1681 words) Table of contents Introduction. 2. Blatchford's view on determinism, free will, andmoral responsibility. 3. Schlick's determinism, freedom and responsibility. 4. Hospers's position. 5. C. A. Campbell's arguments. 6. Taylor's philosophy. 7. Conclusion. 1. In western philosophy such terms as determinism, free will, and moral responsibility are treated differently by different authors. There are three main positions on determinism, free will, and moral responsibility. Those who adhere with hard determinism assert that everything in our world and our actions are predetermined, and decisions we make are not completely ours; moral responsibility is the reflection of free will. Soft determinism philosophers' view is that free will and moral responsibility can be combined with determinism. Libertarianists suppose that that all our actions, decisions and their results depend on us, they are result of rational agency, but not of chance or luck. There are many views and arguments reflecting different philosophers' positions on determinism, free will and moral responsibility, and it is not easy to find correct solution of such problems. Maybe this solution will never be found, as in case of many other philosophic problems. The purpose of this paper is not to find it, but to analyse the views of such philosophers as Blatchford, Schlick, Hospers, Campbell and Taylor on determinism, free will and moral responsibility. The views of these philosophers will be given in connection with my own ideas and views on these philosophic problems. In this paper I will argue that libertarian approach (Campbell and Taylor) reflects reality in more objective view than that of hard determinists (Blatchford, Schlick and Hospers). 2. Blatchford asserts that free will is determined by our nature. Heredity and environment determine our will; he says that "the free will is really controlled by heredity and environment" (Blatchford, p. 104). He also writes that "The free will party seem to think of the will as something independent of the man, as something outside of him. They seem to think that the will decides without the control of the man's reason" (Blatchford, p. 34-35). Of course, heredity and environment play great role in our actions, but I think that free will can depend on personal moral responsibility. Blatchford asserts that our actions can be predictable. Our nature and heredity determine our acts; this statement fits for famous persons too (Napoleon, Lincoln). In addition to that he claims that his work The Delusion of Free Will "disposes of the claim that man is responsible be cause his will is free" (Blatchford, p. 107).So, we can say that Blatchford is a representative of hard determinism. But there is a question. What about twins who live together and therefore have the same heredity and environment Are their free will and moral responsibility expressions equal No. I suppose that their decisions and actions depend on their free will which is not originated from heredity and environment. Their free will is determined by their personal development and the features of personality which can be developed in the process of education and self-development. 3. Moritz Schlick is a representative of logical positivism doctrine. His definition of free will, determinism and moral responsibility derives from the definition of punishment. He supposes that "Punishment is an educative measure, and as such is a means to the formation of motives, which are in part to prevent the wrongdoer from repeating the act (reformation) and in part to prevent others from committing a similar act (intimidation). Analogously, in the case of reward we are concerned with an incentive." (Schlick, p. 152). So, Schlick's view of free will and responsibility is connected with punishment. He supposes that a person in responsible if the punishment for his action is able to change his behavior in the future. So, his determinism differs a little from that of Blatchford. In his point of view, "we are trying to discover who is ultimately responsible" (D'Angelo, p. 37). So, he thinks that moral responsibility is not derived from heredity and environment. But what is the source of free will and moral responsibility Schlick doesn't give any unequivocal answer to this question. I think that moral responsibility depends on the scale of free will of a person and his attitude to the actions of other persons. In other words, our behaviour is the result of both our heredity and nature, and some outside factors which depend on our relation to other persons' behaviour. 4. Hospers' position on this question lies in the area connected with psychoanalytical approach. He supposes that "the unconscious is the master of every fate and the captain of every soul"(Human Beings as Controlled Puppets, p. 758). He, as well as Blatchford and Schlick, supposes that our actions are not completely determined by ourselves, that everything is determined by the factors of unconsciousness. He supposes that we have no control over the events of our life. Hospers opposes his psychoanalytical approach of the free will vs. determinism view. He writes that "that it is the unconscious that determines what the conscious impulse and the conscious action will be. . ." (Free Will and Psychoanalysis, p. 127). So, Hospers is a hard determinist who adhere the point of view that our actions and everything in our world are predetermined, and decisions we make are not completely ours. And what does he think about free will and moral responsibility Hospers supposes that free will doesn't play any sufficient role in our decisions and actions. A person is not able to be responsible for his actions as such key-point factors as environment, heredity and events taking place around us determine our activity. Hospers has almost the same position as Blatchford, but in addition to that he attaches importance to unconscious factors of a person. So, such hard determinists as Blatchford, Schlick and Hospers suggest that we cannot determine our behaviour for ourselves, and everything is determined by such outside factors as heredity, environment and unconscious side of a person. They deny such important (as I suppose) factors as rational agency and personal initiative. But the arguments of other philosophers, such as Campbell and Taylor on determinism, free will and moral responsibility differ from those of Blatchford, Schlick and Hospers. 5. Campbell attaches great importance to moral responsibility in its connection to free will. He supposes that "The proposition which we must be able to affirm if moral praise or blame of X is to be justified is the categorical proposition that X could have acted otherwise because-not if-he could have chosen otherwise; or, it is essentially the inner side of the act that matters, the proposition simply that X could have chosen otherwise" (Campbell, p. 164). So, Campbell admits that a person can have free will, but this will depends on his character and other personal features. Real free will is shown in actions which we cannot forecast and predict. He writes that "if we are satisfied that a person has definitely elected to follow a course which he believes to be wrong, but has been prevented by external circumstances from translating his inner choice into an overt act, we still regard him as morally blameworthy" (Campbell, p. 160). Campbell supposes that moral responsibility is not connected with heredity, but it depends on our character which allows us to act accordingly in different situations. His view is rather different from Hospers'. Campbell's libertarian views draw appropriate attention to moral effort and character of a person, but he underestimate the role of heredity and environment. What is the cause of moral responsibility and free will I suppose that, nevertheless, heredity and environment play appropriate role in our actions and, as follows, in moral responsibility and free will. But what are the main factors I think that there are no real main factors. Free will and moral responsibility are determined by both character and rational agency of a person, and heredity, environment and many other important factors reliable for our behaviour. 6. Taylor's philosophy and view on determinism, free will and moral responsibility reflects the libertarian philosophic position. He attaches large importance to free will and free choice of a person. Taylor asserts that "certain events (namely, human choices) are not completely determined by preceding events; rather, they are caused by the agent of the choice (the person doing the choosing)" (Free Will). This view differs from that of Blatchford, Schlick and Hospers who deny free choice concluding that everything is determined in our decisions and actions. But real free will, according to Taylor, appears in case of strong evaluations which determine important actions and decisions. Taylor, as well as Campbell, supposes that a person who makes acts has free choice to act in another way. And, "according to our definition, the act was freely performed. So not only would such acts be free, but they are also acts for which someone could be held morally responsible" (Free Will). So, Taylor assumes that moral responsibility is reflected in free choice of a person. I support his point of view and think that not only the laws of heredity and nature determine our behaviour - this approach decreases the importance of rational factors. In other words, I adhere with the libertarian view which "maintains that there are acts which are not completely determined by preceding events and the laws of nature, but which are not just random" (Free Will). 7. In this paper I have argued that libertarian approach (Campbell and Taylor) reflects reality in more objective view than that of hard determinists (Blatchford, Schlick and Hospers). The positions of different philosophers are illustrated in comparison with one another - it can help to understand the role of free will and moral responsibility in our behavior. This libertarian view will become increasingly dominant in the coming century given consideration that free will, rational factors and free choice determine the basis of our behavior today. Finally, increased global cooperation and cultural, scientific and philosophic understanding among people can prove that libertarian approach is more objective and takes into account more personal features (rational agency, free will, free choice) than that of hard determinism which is very important for us today. Works Cited Blatchford, Robert. The Delusion of Free Will. in Philosophy: The Basic Issues. Campbell, C.A. (1957). On Selfhood and Godhood. New York: MacMillan Company. D' Angelo, Edward. The Problem of Freedom and Determinism. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1968. Hospers, John. Free Will and Psychoanalysis. Philosophy: The Basic Issues. Hospers, John. (1994) Human Beings as Controlled Puppets, in Samuel Stumpf (Ed.) Philosophy: History and Problems (5th Edition) New York: McGraw-Hill. Lecture 14. Free Will. Introduction to Philosophy. Weber State University Online. (http://wsuonline.weber.edu/course.philo.1010/Lecture14.htm) Schlick Moritz, Problems of Ethics. (New York: Dover, 1962) Read More