Are We Free Or Are We Determined?

Primary Test: "Philosophy: The Quest For Truth," Louis Pojman, Sixth Edition, Pages 344-394

This is a conversation I find so dull that I no longer argue with anyone adamant about defending their viewpoint on either side. Yes, the dual between free will and determinism has gone on for ages and there are probably professional philosophers who, to this day, create very complex arguments to support their views. I don't really care about them because I see them fighting the wrong battles with the wrong ideas. In short, I believe determinism is true to a limit and that free will is always an option so long as it is logical. You may be puzzled by this stance which is why I'm the one typing the blog and you are the one reading it. Let us break it down with definitions straight from Pojman:

Determinism: Everything in the universe is entirely determined by causal laws (A causes B, which causes C, etc), so that whatever happens at any given moment is a result of a prior state of affairs.

Libertarianism (aka Free Will): Some actions are exempt from the causal laws in which the individual does not trace their decision from prior events, or an act which originates ex nihilio (out of nothing).

There is a middle-ground outlook called "soft determinism" but frankly they just want morals, so I will disregard them for being silly.

Now then, a determinist says that all things are effects of a prior cause, and that cause too is the effect of another cause, blah blah blah. So Z is because of Y, Y is because of X, W, V, U, T, S, etc. I bet you just sang the alphabet backwards to make sure that was right. Anyways, this leads to the problem of infinite regression: WHAT CAUSED A??? Some would say God or Allah or some guy named Jeff. Whatever your answer may be, determinism really can't account for this because it leads to only two plausible solutions; 1) there was something that caused itself and is exempt from the law of causality, and if there is one thing that is exempt then that means virtually all agents (people and stuff) are also plausibly free, OR 2) all actions are completely circular, such as counting from 0 to 9 and simply repeating yourself infinitely. 1 suffers from infinite regression and 2 suffers from being circular which, even if you believed time itself to be circular (looking at you, Nietzsche), it would result in all events coming about of their own volition. In short, determinism is dumb in this way.

Libertarianism isn't much better. There is no real test to measure the freedom of an act. If I say "We are testing you to see how much freedom you emit," sitting in a room is just as acceptable as bashing your head against a wall. Realistically, Libertarianism is just a response to Determinism. Free will is determined by where a person is, their skill set, their resources, their past experiences, their morals, etc. Even in the best circumstances it is nearly impossible for Libertarianism to stand up against Determinism since all states of affairs of a persons life are the result of a previous state of of affairs, all the way up to a persons first memory. By the time you realized how to make your own choices you were already set down a path with a very limited range of choices available. Albeit some choices are free, those choices you have to choose from are completely determined.

The biggest issue (for some odd reason) between the two parties is that of moral responsibility. If determinism is true then we cannot be held accountable for our actions, seeing as they are not in our control. For instance, if I was given some meth and got crazy high, and while I was crazy high I kicked my neighbors door down, I could use the excuse that my life was determined so that I would get crazy high and kick their door down. There was simply nothing I could do since I was meant to do this since the beginning of time. Libertarians, and most people I would assume, want to believe in moral responsibility, because it's fun sending people to jail. But seriously, this debate in itself requires us to look at meta-ethics, how we determine what is morally right and morally wrong, how the law plays a role, etc. It is a much larger issue than just, "How much meth did you do before you kicked-in my door?" I have just two words for people on both sides of this debate: just... no.

My Stance

 

More religious folk would probably know the quote, "Are you a free man or a slave?" I contend that all people are both whether we like it or not, but both free men and slaves are held accountable for their actions. You cannot control what others do but you can control what you do, or don't do.

 

While I agree that there is a causality to the universe I certainly see no reason why every action is pre-determined. Aside from the problems stated earlier, there are many things which have virtually no causal explanation, like when someone you love cheats on you out of the blue and then leaves you for that douche. Unquestionably I admit that molecule react in certain ways, physical objects react in specific ways as dictated by the laws of the universe, but gravity and electromagnetism mean very little when a person is deciding between putting black beans or red kidney beans on their burrito. We make hundreds of completely arbitrary decisions all the time, like which leg to start walking with, what to look at while taking a walk, or which memories happen to pop-up and give you terrible panic attacks.

While the physical world may be ruled by determinism, the phenomenological and metaphysical worlds have no such laws. They are almost entirely free with the exception of an agents life conditions. You are not free to decide where you are born, in which family, or how you are treated by those around you, but you are fully in control of your own actions. You can follow you own instinct, follow the orders of others, disobey their orders, do something you know is self-destructive, or do all of those at once by giving up on your best friend for a douche in a hat. (Seriously, I'm not really emotionally attached anymore, but that was a genuinely immoral move. You know who you are.)

10 second version: You're free to do whatever you want to do as long as it is logically possible for you to do it, including meth. Now shut up.

Steve