Free Will and Determinism PDF

Free Will and Determinism PHI101 Introduction to Philosophy Dr. Simon Langford  Outline Introduction Causation and Determinism Determinism and Free Will The Problem of Free Will The Consequence Argument Incompatibilism and Compatibilism Hard Determinism  Int...

Free Will and Determinism PHI101 Introduction to Philosophy Dr. Simon Langford  Outline Introduction Causation and Determinism Determinism and Free Will The Problem of Free Will The Consequence Argument Incompatibilism and Compatibilism Hard Determinism  Introduction Common assumption: much of what we decide to do we do freely.  You might freely decide to go left instead of right.  You might freely choose to go to the movies  Introduction We’ll look at an argument that seems to show the idea of free will is not compatible with science. Imagine: You are kidnapped and forced to kill a number of people. The kidnapper puts a gun in your hand and forces your finger to pull the trigger.  Introduction Next the kidnapper hypnotizes you and persuades you to poison somebody while under hypnosis. Finally, the kidnapper throws you from a plane so that you land on somebody and squash them to death.  Introduction Wouldn’t it be wrong to blame you for the murders? The reason is obvious: you didn’t kill them freely! You were forced to kill them and could not have acted any differently. You are only morally responsible for actions you do freely. (if we are not free of things then we are not resposiple of anything )  Causation and Determinism Science suggests that every event has a cause—i.e., another event which makes it happen. If the clouds formed a perfect picture of Michael Jackson in the sky, scientists would look for the cause.  perhaps very clever Michael Jackson fans caused it to happen,  perhaps scientists working for NASA did it as a joke,  perhaps it was a very unlikely coincidence caused by unusual weather conditions. Scientists would assume there must be some cause.  Causation and Determinism They wouldn’t accept that there could be no cause of the picture whatsoever—it couldn’t just arise from nothing. Such things (uncaused events) may be possible, it’s just that we don’t think they ever actually happen.  Causation and Determinism Determinism: every event that happens was determined (or forced) to happen by previous events which caused it. E.g., the water had to boil when heated to 100º. The heat had to reach the water once the flame was lit. The flame had to light given the gas and the spark. Each event in the chain was forced to happen by previous events.  Causation and Determinism With determinism, events follow one from another like falling dominoes.  Determinism and Free Will If every event is determined by earlier events, this applies to human actions too. E.g., Hitler’s invasion of Poland was determined by an earlier event— his decision to invade Poland. His decision also has a cause, and that cause also has a cause, and that cause also has a cause and so on.  Determinism and Free Will C3 C2 C1 Hitler’s decision the invasion This chain will take us back to causes that existed before Hitler was born. Hitler’s decision seems inevitable—determined by events beyond Hitler’s control in the distant past of the universe. If so, it’s hard to see how Hitler can be blamed for his decision—he couldn’t have acted differently! The same goes for any human action.  The Problem of Free Will The “problem of free will” is that it seems like we have free will—we can freely decide to go to the movies or stay home. Science tells us that every event has a cause which determines that the event will happen. These two ideas seem to be in conflict. If our decisions are caused by earlier events which are caused by earlier events, it looks like they had to happen and we were never free to decide differently. The Problem of Free Will State of the universe when it began Everything that happens afterwards Laws of nature  The Problem of Free Will Suppose somebody thousands of years ago had complete knowledge of the arrangements of particles in the universe and complete knowledge of the laws of nature. According to determinism, they could have predicted exactly what we would do throughout our entire lives. In that case, how can we be free? How can we be blamed (or praised) for doing things which we were determined to do and could not have avoided doing?  The Consequence Argument Peter van Inwagen expressed this idea in his Consequence Argument. (1) There is nothing I can do to cause the distant past or the laws of nature to be different. (2) Necessarily, given how the distant past was and given the laws of nature, all my actions will follow exactly as they are. (3) Therefore, there is nothing I can do to cause my actions to be different. (4) Therefore, I must do what I do, and cannot do otherwise.  The Consequence Argument Van Inwagen’s point is that if we want to defend free will, we need to show where the Consequence Argument goes wrong. (He wants to reject the argument.)  Compatibilism and Incompatibilism There are two broad views about free will and determinism. Incompatibilism Compatibilism Incompatibilism: free will and determinism are incompatible—they cannot both be true. I.e., if we are free, determinism is false. If determinism is true, we are not free. Compatibilism: even if determinism is true, we can still have free will!  Compatibilism and Incompatibilism Incompatibilism divides into two kinds. Incompatibilism Hard determinism Libertarianism Hard determinism: determinism is true, and we do not have free will. Libertarianism: we have free will, and determinism is false.  Compatibilism and Incompatibilism Compatibilism (soft determinism) Compatibilism is also known as soft determinism. Soft determinism: determinism is true but we also have free will.  Hard Determinism Hard determinists reject free will: We must get used to the idea that no one is really responsible for anything. Belief in freedom and moral responsibility was a luxury of a pre-scientific age. Now that we have grown up, we must put aside childish ways and face the facts. Science has disproved the existence of freedom and morality.  Hard Determinism Sounds depressing, but that doesn’t mean it is false. Hard determinists might argue that it is not as bad as it sounds. We can still punish criminals and praise people for good behavior. Criminals don’t deserve to be punished (they’re not responsible for what they do). But it is still useful for society to lock them up for the safety of others and to deter people from committing crime.  Hard Determinism Perhaps this conclusion even helps us to understand criminals better. People who do good don’t deserve praise (they couldn’t have acted any differently). But it is useful to praise them because praise encourages others to act in the same way. Perhaps this conclusion helps us to be humble. Still, many philosophers find this position unacceptable and look for an alternative solution to the problem of free will.  Summary The Problem of Free Will We seem to be free But science tells us that all events have a cause The causes of an event determine that event, (i.e., they force it to happen) If human decisions are determined, it looks like our actions had to happen and couldn’t have been different The Consequence Argument Incompatibilism and Compatibilism Hard determinism and Libertarianism  Questions Explain the idea of determinism and say why it seems to pose a problem for the idea of free will. State the consequence argument in your own words, and say why it seems to show that our actions are not free. Define compatibilism and incompatibilism in your own words. What is the difference between libertarianism and hard determinism? What do you think of hard determinism? Can you accept it?