Post #9 Free Will – Soft Determinism

     We have now observed the two kinds of incompatibilist theories, hard determinism and libertarianism, which hold the free will and a deterministic universe cannot coexist without conflict. However, hard determinism in its rigidity and libertarianism in its loose connections both might seem insufficient and lacking in their theories. Now we will look at a soft determinism, which hopes to merge these seemingly separate views into one view which might appeal to all people.

    Soft determinism is a theory which has been around since the time of the ancient Stoics, and is a compatibilist theory, which means that, unlike the incompatibilist theories, free will and a deterministic universe are capable of coexistence without conflict. The challenge that soft determinists face, however, is finding that balance in which two concepts as dichotomous as these two are can coexist. Soft determinists attempt this in a variety of ways. One of which is by changing the definition of what is considered free will. Many change this by saying that free will is enacted when one acts in accordance with their own motivation, meaning that the person acted without being forced or coerced in any way. This motive might be casually determined and fated to be the motive, but nevertheless as long as the person is acting with what they will, it is considered a free action. To use such a definition allows for the dismissal of the validity of causal determinism, as the defining of what is considered free will is not reliant on being an opposite of determinism. Another view is that of all alternative options one believes they have are nothing more than illusory. These people think that everything is determined, and any statements made are made in ignorance of the path determined. For example, when someone says "It is going to snow tomorrow", that statement is either true or false, as we cannot conclude today whether it is determined or not to snow tomorrow. 

    Soft determinism is not without faults, though. One of the largest criticisms philosophers tend to have against soft determinism is that in order for the theory to be consistent, it must alter the definition of free will. For those incompatibilists (subscribers to hard determinism or libertarianism), free will must refer to the legitimate existence of alternative options, rather than leaving the free will's existence to the mind of the agent.

    This concludes the main three theories of the free will debate, and, though soft determinism attempts to bridge the divide between a deterministic world and a world with free will, many still believe that this is an unsatisfactory answer, refining their individual versions of hard determinism or libertarianism to suit the arguments presented.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Post #3 Ethics – Utilitarianism

      For the next moral theory we look at in the ethics series, we will now look at utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a very popular and well-known moral theory because it is applied almost every day in our lives. Where other theories such as categorical imperative are used occasionally in our lives, utilitarianism is used the rest of the time when making moral  decisions, almost guaranteed.       Utilitarianism tends to have different offshoots, which we will discern later, but for now we will focus on the same overall idea between every form of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory, meaning that, alternatively to Kant's categorical imperative, the rightness and wrongness of an action can only be determined by the consequences of that action. Utilitarianism is a combination of three theses: hedonism, maximalism, and universalism. Hedonism is the idea that pleasure is the highest good, and as such is the only thing...
Read more

Post #7 Free Will – Hard Determinism

      One issue that is given just as much light as ethics is the debate of free will. Since the time of the original philosophers, the question has been posited as to whether the actions of man and the universe have been predestined since the original impetus, or if destiny is malleable enough that we control our own individual fates with all events being anything but  certain. The first theory that we will look at is that of hard determinism.     Hard determinism is one of two  incompatibilist theories. I ncompatibilism  is a form of theory in the free will debate which claims that free will and determinism are unable to exist simultaneously, and one is necessarily true while the other must be necessarily false. Hard determinism is the theory which states that determinism must be true and any belief in the existence of free will is false. Hard determinism views reality almost like an endless line of dominoes. One event occurs, necessitating...
Read more

Post #4 Ethics – Criticisms of Utilitarianism

      Utilitarianism is a common moral theory, used by government's and others who oversee a population of people such that their community might thrive. However, in a moral system purposed towards the pleasure of the majority, there are bound to be problems found within the system that need to be acknowledged before ruin.     Robert Nozick is one of the most notable objectors to hedonistic utilitarianism, though more of an opponent to the hedonism part than the utilitarianism part (though it is important to note that Nozick didn't necessarily believe pleasure wasn't of intrinsic value, just that it wasn't the only intrinsically valuable thing). Nozick was the creator of one of the most difficult challenges hedonism faces today: the Experience Machine. In Nozick's Experience Machine, imagine that a machine exists that, when activated, will give the user all the experience they could want, meaning if they want all...
Read more