Essay, Research Paper: Freewill And Determinism Conflict (choice)

We ought then regard the present state of the universe as the effect of its previous state and the
cause of the one which is to follow. An intelligence knowing at a given instant of time all the
forces operating in nature, as well as the position at that instant of all things of which the
universe consists, would be able to comprehend the motions of the largest bodies in the universe
and those of the smallest atoms in a single formula - provided that it was sufficiently powerful to
submit all these data analysis. To it nothing would be uncertain and the future would be present
to its eyes as much as the past.

This passage comes from P.S. de Laplace's "Philosophical Essay on Probabilities." If such
determinism is true, then everyone's every thought and action must be inevitable; that no
one really has any choice about anything, because we are all helpless products of blind
forces which have made us what we are. In this paper concerning the free will and
determinism debate I will argue that determinism is not plausible, I shall do this by giving
reasons for determining how determinism is false, give arguments for determinism, and
then refute those arguments.
There are those who think that our behavior is a result of free choice, but there are
others who presume "we are servants of cosmic destiny or that behavior is nothing but a
reflex of heredity and environment." The position of determinism is that every event is
the necessary outcome of a cause or set of causes. That everything is a consequence of
external forces, and such forces produce all that happens. Man is not free. If we accept
the determinist argument and assume human behavior as a consequence of external factors
rather than of free choice, then we must realize that our explanation of human behavior
leaves no room for morality. If people do not choose their actions, then they are not really
responsible for them, and there is no need for praising or blaming them. If determinism
were true, then there would be no basis for human effort, for why should a person make
an effort if what he or she does doesn't make a difference? If what will be will be, then
one has an excuse for doing nothing. Life would not be so meaningful for people on
deterministic grounds. "The nature of human life may be such that man must understand
himself as being free, for human life as we know it would not make much sense without
the concept of freedom." The challenge and struggle usually emerge from situations,
such as helping to recycle or reaching out to youths in inner city projects, in which
individuals feel that their effort can make a difference.
In our everyday lives, there are many times when we have to make decisions; what
we are going to eat for breakfast, or where we are going to walk. When we talk or write,
we are deciding on the arrangement of our thoughts, and we have to search for the right
expressions. Our life, while we are awake and active, is a mixture of important and
unimportant choices. Having free will means that we are able to act voluntarily, that we
could have decided to act differently than we did. When someone is criticized for looking
sloppy, or making an offensive remark, he may try to excuse himself with a "I could not
help it" remark. But if he is a normal person mentally, then he could have helped it; he
could have acted differently. "The great American pragmatist William James in his famous
essay 'The Dilemma of Determinism,' James rejects determinism on the grounds that there
is no free choice. James appealed to direct experience to provide evidence of the
existence of free choice." Feelings which we all have such as regret or remorse makes no
sense unless there is free will. People experience regret or sorrow only because they
believe they could have done otherwise. If determinism were true, then people could
never have done otherwise and there should be no reason to feel any regret.
A determinist may argue that human behavior is caused by environment conditions,
general trends, circumstances, and social economic forces beyond human effort and will.

"Freudians have shown that men do things not because of free choice but because of deep
unconscious forces and libidinal energy or sexual drives. Darwin described man as a product of
evolution, as any animal is; Marx showed how man is shaped by economic forces over which he
has no control; and behaviorist psychologist explained human behavior of evidence in favor of
deterministic thesis."

Determinist believes that people believe they are free only because they're ignorant of the
causes of their actions. Spinoza makes that point when he says, "Men are deceived in
thinking themselves free, a belief that consists of the causes by which they are
determined." He continues: "In the mind there is no absolute, or free will. The mind is
determined to this or that volition by a cause, which is likewise determined by another
cause, ad infinitum." All of his philosophy reflected the deterministic view that we are
not free to change the world because we are all part of a grand causal chain, but his
philosophy also claims the idea that if we accept determinism we free ourselves from
ignorance and emotional servitude. If a person has the capacity to free himself from the
bondage of ignorance and emotional impulses and come to agree with Spinoza, then this
would seem to be a very significant type of freedom. So it can be concluded that Spinoza
was saying something absurd or that he understood the reality and value of freedom.
Human experience over the course of history does rely itself on freedom.
If determinism is true, why should people bother deliberating about what to do or
deciding and choose seriously? If determinism is true, then whatever is determined to
happen by the past history of the universe is going to happen. A person's biography was
written before he or she was born, so there's no sense in making an effort. Whatever will
be will be, whatever the person do or don't do. So then why even bother getting out of
bed?


Anthony Flew, Western Philosophy (New York: Bobb_Merrill Company, 1971), p. 223.

Thomas Ellis Katen, Doing Philosophy (New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc, 1973), p. 321.

Ibid., p. 386.

Ibid., p. 315.

Spinoza. The Ethics. Part 2, proposition 35, sholium.

Ibid., proposition 48.