Freewill Vs Determinism in Psychology PDF

**Freewill Vs Determinism in Psychology** Free will is the idea that behaviour is not constrained by either current circumstances or past experience. That is, the way individuals act is not simply a response to an immediate stimulus, nor determined solely by previous events. Instead, human beings c...

**Freewill Vs Determinism in Psychology** Free will is the idea that behaviour is not constrained by either current circumstances or past experience. That is, the way individuals act is not simply a response to an immediate stimulus, nor determined solely by previous events. Instead, human beings choose and decide how to behave based on their subjective assessment of a situation. Determinism, on the other hand, is the assumption that all behaviour has specific causes. Free will is also termed as non-determinism. It is a complete rejection of scientific psychology. The psychologists believing in the perspective of non-determinism suggest that behaviour does not necessarily have a cause, because it is self-generated. This is the complete opposite of determinism, suggesting that behaviour does not have a specific cause, it is rather freely chosen. This perspective is held by the humanistic and existential psychologists. The debate of free will versus determinism is about the assumption of whether or not behaviour is under one's own control. The proponents of free will suggest that every individual is in control of their own behaviour; they can act independently of all external forces. The other side of the argument, that is, the proponents of determinism, suggest that behaviour is caused by forces beyond one's control. The debate of free will versus determinism centers around the notion of causation. For determinists the assumption is that every event in the universe has a cause. Since human beings are also a part of the universe, all human behaviours have a cause. The psychologists who have a scientific orientation go along with a deterministic perspective in the study of human behaviour. They feel that the more causes of behaviour will be known, the more human behaviour can be controlled and be predictable. Prediction and control of behaviour is a criterion to demonstrate that behaviour has a cause. The Complexity of Determinism  Even though all the determinists assume that behaviours have a cause, they are in agreement that it is not possible to know all the causes of behaviour. One of the reasons for this is that behaviour, mostly, has more than one cause. That is, behaviour is overdetermined. Behaviour is not, usually, caused by a single event. Instead, there are a multitude of events that interact together, causing a specific behaviour. Another reason for why it is considered to be impossible to know all the causes of behaviour is the aspect of fortuity, that is, sometimes behaviours happen accidently or take place by chance. Behaviour taking place due to fortuity, still makes it deterministic. But it is making determinism more complicated. Fortuitous circumstances may not really predict behaviour, but it is certainly causing it. Apart from behaviour being overdetermined and fortuity, determinism becomes complicated because of the notion of indeterminism. When there is an uncertainty about the causes of behaviour, then it is known as indeterminism. A number of psychologists do believe in the doctrine of determinism, but they feel that the causes of behaviour cannot be measured in an accurate manner. The reason why it is suggested that the cause of behaviour cannot be measured is that observation of the behaviour will in itself change the behaviour. This perspective has been borrowed from the uncertainty principle given by the German physicist Werner Karl Heisenberg. Heisenberg found that when electrons are observed, the act of observation influences its activity, which can lead to changing its direction. This creates a lot of doubt on the validity of that observation. Accordingly, Heisenberg suggested that nothing can be known with certainty. In a similar manner, in experimental psychological studies, the setting of the experiment becomes a confounding variable, playing a role in causing the behaviour. Therefore, it does not become possible to know about the cause in an accurate way. The psychologists that accept this perspective suggest that behaviour has specific causes, but cannot be known with certainty. Determinists suggest that the idea of causation gets very complicated with respect to human behaviour, as it is not easy to make predictions. However, determinists believe that as more knowledge regarding human behaviour and its causes are gained, making accurate predictions will become easier. **Physical and Psychical Determinism** Determinism can be broadly classified as physical determinism and psychical determinism. If a cause of behaviour can be directly measured and can be quantified, then it is called physical determinism. Physical determinism includes biological, environmental, and socio-cultural determinism. Biological determinism is about the role of physiological processes or genetics in determining behaviour. Environmental determinism is about the role of environmental stimuli in behaviour -- the source of the behaviour is in the environment, and not within the individual. Sociocultural determinism emphasizes the role of culture, norms, and customs in determining behaviour. In all these cases the causes of behaviour, for instance, genes, environmental stimuli, customs, can be accessed and are quantifiable. Thus, psychologists involved in biopsychology, behavioural theory, and cultural psychology go along with the idea of physical determinism. In contrast to physical determinism, when the causes of behaviour are explained in terms of cognitive and emotional experiences, then it is called psychical determinism. In such a case, the causes of behaviour are said to be subjective, and cannot be directly measured or quantified. These mainly include personal beliefs, emotions, perceptions, ideas, and values, among others. The psychologists that emphasize on conscious, non-conscious, and unconscious mental events such as cognitive psychologists and psychoanalysts go along with the idea of psychical determinism. **Free Will, Determinism, and Personal Responsibility** When talking about free will and determinism, the aspect of personal responsibility comes into play. Free will, that is, behaviour being selfgenerated, indicates that every individual is responsible for their own behaviour. On the other hand, with respect to determinism, if every behaviour has a cause (physical or psychical), the individual has no personal responsibility for his or her actions. For instance, according to determinism, a person who commits a crime, the criminal action could have been caused by some circumstances in that person's life or the neural circuitry of that person might have triggered him of her to behave in that manner. Whereas, according to free will, the criminal activity was well within control of the individual, and if he or she wanted, it could have been avoided. It is due to this lack of personal responsibility with respect to determinism, that has led to it facing criticism. However, according to William James, the major precursor to the school of functionalism, one type of determinism actually involves personal responsibility. William James differentiates between hard determinism and soft determinism. When the cause of behaviour is said to be automatic or mechanistic, then it is referred to as hard determinism. In such cases, there will be no personal responsibility. Soft determinism, on the other hand, involves cognitive processes like intention, motivation, and beliefs. These processes intervene between experience and behaviour. In such cases, behaviour is governed by thoughtful deliberation, which indicates personal responsibility for the action of the individual. There are cognitive and rational processes involved in behaviour, according to soft determinism, which actually give individuals a choice to act in a specific manner. These processes, however, are the causes of behaviour. Thus, even though being deterministic, behaviour is self-governed. Soft determinism, therefore, is a comprise between hard determinism and free will, which suggests that personal responsibility can be involved in determinism also, and not just free will. Free Will Versus Determinism: Systems in Psychology  Throughout the history of psychology, it can be found that different systems of psychology have opposed each other with respect to free will and determinism. Psychology became an independent discipline by incorporating the scientific method. One aspect of the scientific approach is the assumption of determinism. The initial perspectives that emerged, thus, were deterministic in nature. The perspectives that followed, also believed in the idea of determinism. However, there were perspectives that disagreed with the earlier systems in strictly using the scientific approach. They felt that the scientific approach is not very suitable for studying human behaviour. These were the systems that were more in favor of the idea of free will. Associationism is considered to be one the oldest perspectives in psychology. With its emphasis on laws that govern behaviour, associationism is largely deterministic in its approach. Structuralism, the first school of psychology, due to being rigid in using the mechanistic principle, is deterministic in nature. The second school of psychology, functionalism, giving emphasis to adaptation in relation to the environment, is deterministic. Psychoanalysis, suggesting that behaviour is caused by the unconscious and childhood experiences, is deterministic in nature. Gestalt psychology, emphasizing on universal laws that govern perceptual organization and information processing, is deterministic. Behaviourism, suggesting that stimuli within the external environment causes behaviour, is deterministic. Many of the perspectives that emerged later, can also be termed as deterministic. Cognitive psychology, emphasizing on behaviour being caused by internal cognitive processes such as thoughts, beliefs, is deterministic. Social psychology, emphasizing on the role of situation and context in behaviour, is deterministic. Cultural psychology, suggesting that cultural processes such as norms, values shape behaviour, is deterministic. Neuropsychology, emphasizing on the brain and neural processes in shaping behaviour, is deterministic. Finally, evolutionary psychology, giving emphasis on genetics in behaviour, is deterministic. There are other perspectives in psychology that oppose and criticize the idea of determinism. These perspectives suggest that human beings have free will. Humanistic psychology, suggesting that every individual has the potential to overcome obstacles to achieve self-actualization, believes in free will. Existential psychology, suggesting that human beings have purpose in life and are seeking meaning in life, believes in free will. **\ ** **Rationalism and Empiricism** Rationalism and Empiricism are two sides of the same coin of philosophy which have diverging differences, especially when it comes to their belief systems. What those differences are will be highlighted at length in this article. The information taken from this article will be useful in the [IAS Exam](https://byjus.com/ias-exam/) **What is the main difference between Rationalism and Empiricism?** The main difference between Rationalism And Empiricism is that rationalism is the knowledge that is derived from reason and logic while on the other hand empiricism is the knowledge that is derived from experience and experimentation. [Rationalism](https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/rationalism/) is about intuition while empiricism is about visual concepts. Mathematics is rationalism while experimental science is empiricism. Rationalism is the term used in philosophy to refer to the knowledge that is derived from reason and logic. It is a view which appeals to reason to be a source of any knowledge. Any justification which is given with a reason or a logic, that is intellectual is rationalism. Rationalists believe that everything has a logic behind it, reality has logic and logical knowledge is correct. Empiricism on the other hand is the term in which the main source of knowledge is experience and experimentation. Rather than just an innate idea, empiricists believe that there is a shred of empirical evidence behind every knowledge. It is a philosophy of science that emphasizes evidence, evidence that is discovered through experiments. **Comparison Between Rationalism And Empiricism** Basis of Comparison Rationalism Empiricism --------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Definition Rationalism is the term used in philosophy to refer to the knowledge that is derived from reason and logic. [Empiricism](https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/empiricism/) is the term used in philosophy in which the main source of knowledge is experience and experimentation. Belief Rationalists believe that reason can explain the working of the world. The empiricists believe that evidence through experimentation can explain reality. Principles Rationalism is related to mental processes and organizing principles. Empiricism is related to sensory experience and association principles History The history of rationalism goes far beyond the Pythagoras' time that is 570--495 BCE. The history of empiricism goes to the era between 600 to 200 BCE. Examples Mathematics is an example of rationalism. Experimental Science is an example of empiricism. **What is Rationalism?** Rationalism is a theory of philosophy in which it is believed that reason and logic are the main sources of knowledge. It is a methodology that says that justification or reason is the view that shows the basis of knowledge. Rationalism goes back in history to 570-495 BCE. Rationalists believe that logic and reasons can reveal the reality of the world, that some truths exist which can be grasped directly through the intellect. Rationalism can be seen in logical reasoning, mathematics, morals and ethics, and metaphysics. Rationalists highly believe that the reason is fundamentally true and they cannot be denied. They believe that knowledge is independent of sensory experience. There are three basic claims in rationalism. Out of these three claims, rationalists have to adopt at least one. These three thesis are the intuition or deduction thesis, the innate knowledge thesis, and the innate concept thesis. In addition to these, there are two more theories, although a person can be a rationalist without adopting either of them. One is the claim of Indispensability of Reason and the second one is the Superiority of Reason claim. The philosopher and historian William James criticizes the theory of rationalism because it is outdated and does not touch reality. He opposed that the rationalist represents the world as a closed system. **What is Empiricism?** Empiricism is the term used in philosophy, which states that experimentation and sensory experience is the major source of knowledge. Rather than ideas empiricism emphasized the pieces of evidence. Experiments and evidence show the reality of the world, according to empiricists. Throughout history, the theory of empiricism is described as a blank slate that is filled with experience over time. The human mind is like the blank slate which is empty by birth and is filled in by experience, learning, and experiments. Knowledge is based on the experience we gain, the possibilities and probabilities of our actions, the falsification, the experimental procedure. The word Empirical is derived from an ancient Greek word "empeiria", which means experience. The history of the belief in empiricism goes far back to 600 to 200 BCE. An ancient Indian philosopher named Kanada had accepted that the two sources of knowledge are perception and inference. This is mentioned in his work called Vaisesika Sutra, which is an ancient Sanskrit text. Empiricists believe that experience, and memory develops the person and his morals. They also believe that evidence, any kind of proof which is found by experiment, can reveal the world's reality, rather than some reason and logic. **Conclusion** Rationalism and Empiricism are both terms used in philosophy. Both the terms are used under the term epistemology, which is a branch of philosophy concerned with knowledge. Although the terms sound the same, they are too different from each other. Actually, the terms have always been used as opposed to each other. It's an old controversy. Though both are theories. Rationalism regards reasons and logic as the main source of knowledge. They believe in the reasoning behind things and reality. Rationalists believe logic and reason will explain the world's reality. Rationalists believe that they are independent of sensory experience. **[Consciousness]** Two dominant perspectives on consciousness representing the eastern and the western viewpoints are discussed. In the western scholarly tradition, \(a) consciousness is generally equated with the mind; \(b) intentionality is regarded as its defining characteristic; and \(c) the goal is one of seeking rational understanding of what consciousness/mind is. In the eastern tradition, as represented by the Indian approach to the study of consciousness, (a) consciousness and mind are considered to be different; \(b) consciousness as such is believed to be nonintentional while the mind is regarded as intentional; and \(c) the goal is one of developing practical methods for transformation of the human condition via realization of consciousness as such. It is suggested that consciousness encompasses two different domains, the transcendental and the phenomenal, and that humans enjoy dual citizenship in them. The eastern and western viewpoints each seems to be directed more toward one domain than the other, resulting in a biased emphasis. Seen as complementary rather than in opposition to each other, the eastern and the western perspectives may give us a more comprehensive understanding of consciousness and its role in our being. **The Mind-Body Problem** The mind-body problem has been an age-old issue in psychology, which clearly has its roots in philosophy. There has always been the question about the existence of a mind, and the ways in which it could be related to the body. In other words, the issue of mind and body is about mental events and physical events, whether they are related, and how are they related. Different philosophers and psychologists throughout the years have tried to explain this in their own ways. Some suggest that all events can be explained in physical terms. They believe that all mental events are aspects of physical events. The ones who go along with this notion are called materialists. The materialists believe that matter is the only reality. Accordingly, they suggest that everything in the universe, including thoughts, feelings, and behaviour can be explained in terms of matter. Because they explain everything with respect to one type of reality, they are also called monists. In contrast to materialists, there the idealists. The idealists believe that physical reality is based on perception. They are also monists, because like the materialists, they are also explaining everything in terms of one type of reality, that is, the mind or consciousness. A number of psychologists, however, believe that both physical and mental events exist simultaneously, and are governed by different principles. This position is referred to as dualism. **Materialism** Thomas Hobbes, the founder of British Empiricism, was one of the major proponents of materialism. He was highly influenced by the emergence of science at his time, especially by the ideas of Galilei Galileo, which is reflected in his views about human nature. Hobbes solely believed in the physical reality. According to him, human beings are like engines, suggesting that behaviour and the causes operating on it can be explained in terms of the body. He also emphasized that the idea of a soul independent of the body does not exist. Hobbes asserted that the body and the person are the same thing. He strongly believed that all matter is in motion and is determined by external forces acting upon it. He explained human thought, in the same way. He explained human thought in terms of motion of things that affect or act on the senses of individuals, which then creates motion in the senses. According to Hobbes, subsequent to this motion, another motion gets created in the brain until it is degraded by other new motions. Hobbes was, therefore, a strong materialist, in such that he explained all human behaviour and thoughts in terms of the physical, that is, the body. **Idealism** Idealism, another form of monism, emphasizes the role of the ideal or spiritual in experience. According to idealism, reality is mainly about conscious experiences, and that abstract entities are important in understanding reality. It also emphasizes that all that exists can be known in terms of mental events, through ideas. The two basic forms of idealism are metaphysical idealism and epistemological idealism. Metaphysical idealism emphasizes on theorizing about the nature of reality in terms of ideas. It can be viewed as the complete opposite of materialism, which views reality only in terms of matter. Epistemological idealism asserts that in processing knowledge, the mind can grasp only what is psychic in nature, and that the conditioning of objects is in terms of their perceptibility. **Dualism** René Descartes, regarded as the founder of modern philosophy, did not agree with the materialism of Hobbes. Descartes felt that the mind and body problem is not as simple as Hobbes had thought of. Descartes believed that human beings are thinking beings, and cannot be described in terms of materialism. According to him, human beings are incorporeal, and are only contingently embodied. This belief of Descartes laid the foundation for the philosophical idea of dualism. Descartes believed that humans are made of two substances -- the soul or mind, and the body. The mind, according to Descartes is completely a thinking substance. The body, on the other hand, is a physical substance, and follows the mechanical laws. The mind and the body are, thus, two very distinct entities. However, it no way means that the mind does not interact with the body. According to Descartes, the mind and body both influence each other. Descartes suggested that the mind can make the body perform voluntary actions. Thus, the mind is not simply a mere observer of the activities of the body. Because Descartes suggested that the mind and body interact with each other, this view is also called interactionism. Interactionism is also referred to as Cartesian dualism. Descartes, further, suggested that mind or the soul resides in the pineal gland, situated at the top of the brain. The pineal gland is then the seat of the mind and is the physical organ where the mind exercises its functions. Further, Descartes suggested it is through the pineal gland that the mind makes the body to act or inhibit action. When the mind wills something to happen, the pineal gland gets stimulated. This, in turn, stimulates the appropriate brain areas, leading to the behaviour that was willed. The mind being free, can inhibit or modify the reflexive behaviour that the environment elicits in a mechanical manner. Unlike behaviour, according to Descartes, emotions are experienced in a conscious manner. Emotions include passions like love, hate, wonder, desire, joy, anger, and sadness. Descartes believed that the will controls the passions in order to result virtuous conduct. For instance, if there is an experience of anger and aggression is viewed as appropriate, only then the mind will allow or facilitate it. If not, the mind will try to inhibit such behaviours. If the intensity of any of the passions is high then it is possible that the will may not be able to prevent any of the reflexive actions, which will make the individual to behave in an irrational manner. Descartes' idea of dualism shows how the mind, as an immaterial entity, interacts with the body, as a material entity. The idea of Descartes is very different from that of Hobbes, who believed that everything is material. Descartes, however, clearly suggested that the mind and body are very distinct from each other, even though there is interaction between them. Descartes strongly believed that the mind cannot be explained in terms of materialism. The mind, according to Descartes, is not made of material substances. The body, on the other hand, Descartes suggested, is made of material substances. For him, the body, which involves some mechanical processes, can be explained in terms of materialism. **Double Aspectism** The idea of double aspectism was introduced by the French philosopher, Baruch Spinoza. Double aspectism opposed materialism, idealism, and dualism (especially, interactionism). Initially, Spinoza was highly influenced and impressed by the philosophy of Descartes. The first book of Spinoza was about Cartesian philosophy. Eventually, however, Spinoza disagreed with Descartes and his idea of mind and matter being separate entities. Spinoza, instead, suggested that both are different aspects of the same substance. Spinoza believed that the mind and body are inseparable, like being two sides of the same coin. The mind and body being inseparable, Spinoza believed that something that happens to the body is experienced as thoughts and emotions, and these thoughts and emotions influence the body. In suggesting the mind and body being two different aspects of the same entity, Spinoza combined physiology and philosophy into one system. His position on the mind-body issue is referred to as psychophysical double aspectism, or double-aspect monism, or simply double aspectism. Even though the perspective of Descartes has been highly popular, his dualism has not been appreciated with respect to scientific scrutiny. In comparison to that, the perspective of Spinoza has been found to be more in line with modern, scientific psychology. Spinoza's approach has, in fact, formed the basis of many aspects of modern psychology. Descartes's Cartesian philosophy, with respect to that, has failed. Spinoza's double aspectism led him to propose the notion of psychic determinism, which stimulated the scientific analysis of the mind. Spinoza is often regarded as the first modern thinker to talk about human behaviour, strictly from a deterministic perspective. This, eventually, turned out to be instrumental for Theodor Gustav Fechner and Wilhelm Wundt in introducing the experimental method in psychology. Types of Dualism  Interactionism: According to interactionism, the mind and body influence each other, indicating that there is an interaction between the mind and the body. Interactionism suggests that the mind can initiate behaviour. René Descartes was the first person to propose this form of mind-body relationship. Sigmund Freud, and the other psychoanalysts have also taken this position of dualism. Psychoanalysis suggests that mental events like conflict and anxiety can cause body ailments, which depicts and interaction between mind and body. Emergentism: Emergentism claims that mental states emerge the physical state. A variant of emergentism suggests that one the mental events emerge from the physical state (brain), the mental events are able to influence brain activity. This means that there is a reciprocal relationship between the mind and the brain (body), making it similar to interactionism. Roger Sperry, the Nobel-prize winner, was a proponent of this. Epiphenomenalism: Epiphenomenalism is a type of emergentism, which is different from interactionism. According to epiphenomenalism, the brain causes mental events, but the mental events cannot influence the brain. This indicates that from the perspective of epiphenomenalism, mental events are the by-products of physical events (brain), but it has no influence on the brain. John Watson, the founder of Behaviourism, initially had taken the position of epiphenomenalism, but later he became a physical monist. Psychophysical Parallelism: Psychophysical parallelism suggests the mind and body are completely independent of each other, and have no interaction. According to psychophysical parallelism, environmental experiences influence the mind and body simultaneously, and one does not affect the other. Wilhelm Wundt and Edward Titchener, both, had taken this position. Pre-established Harmony: According to pre-established harmony, mind and body are two separate entities, and mental events are different from physical events, but both are co-ordinated by some external agent. Double Aspectism: Double aspectism talks about mind and body, which makes it related to dualism. According to double aspectism, an individual experiences of both mental and physical events However, this position, proposed by Spinoza, suggests that mind and body are not separate from each other; they are two aspects of the same entity, a unity.