ethics theme 4 free will and determinism

Hard determinism

• can be no freedom

• Also called an incompatibilist

Soft determinist

• some elements of free will exist but some is still determined

Libertarian

• We have freedom to choose

Philosophical determinism definition

• logical, everything must have a cause

• Universal causation

Scientific determinism definition

• laws of physics say nothing can happen without a cause

• Biology determines what creatures can do

Psychological determinism defintion

• in rational creatures like humans, behaviour is conditioned.

Religious determinism definition

• god is believed to ordained destiny in a way that is unalterable

Philosophical determinism.

Scholar and example

• john Locke

-all our ideas are based on experience, not reason

-nothing happens, except that it was caused some way by something

-the universe is explainable as an unbreakable chain of causes= universal causation

-the future is as determined to someone who knows all the causes as the past

• analogy:

-man wakes up in a room locked from the outside

-he stays in the room and he feels free and believes he has chosen to stay there when in actual fact he can only stay there.

John lockes experience of free will shows:

• just an illusion- we do not know all the causes evading to an event

• Our reflection on being free is what creates this illusion

• No choices to be made at all

“Iron ___ universe” ____ ____

“Iron block universe” William James

Describes John lockes view

Who and what is against determinism

• jean Paul statre

• Philosophical determinism

“But if you can ___ with so much ___, that you have ____, then you must have it” - ___ __ ___

“ but if you can deny with so much effort, that you have freedom, the you must have it” - jean Paul statre

John Paul statre

• his views

• denied radical freedom

• An act of “ bad faith”, the worst possible sin is denying our freedom.

Analogy of the waiter - Satre

• at a cafe Satre begins to consider the waiter and asks himself questions

• The waiter is very good at his job, a better waiter than a person perhaps

• Is the man a waiter because he wants to be or because he has no other choice?

• Is this how he actually is or is it molded to be a perfect waiter?

• Is he authentically a waiter or is he escaping his own freedom and fitting into a convention?

Stares philosophy of existentialism

• emphasises the need to become aware of the choices we can make ans seizing them if we want to

• Lying to ourselves that we have no other options but to do as we do

• Blaming the environment etc is bad faith and causes us to waste our life and happiness

“Man is ___ else but that which he makes of ___. That is the first ___ of _____”

“ man is nothing else but that which he makes himself. That is the first principle of existentialism”

Scientific determinism - dice analogy

• Having all the information of a dice - weight roughness etc

• In theory you could now what would end up on top

• In practive it is too far complex but just shows randomness is not intrinsic but just our lack of information

Isaac newton - theory of forces in the universe

• he discovered laws of motion that predict how forces act on an object

• Laws of thermodynamics show how the universe is a close system - energy conserved nothing created or destroyed nothing comes in or out

• These laws suggest that we live in a mechanical, clockwork universe where everything is determined by physical forced which can be determined

Scientific determinism - is there a real you?

• claims that it can predict apparently free human choices, by studying brain activity prior to awareness

“My neurons made me do it”

The libit experiment - two stage model of free will

1- the intention

2-then becoming conscious of the intention

- our experience of free will is a by product of prior brain processses

Dr sirigus “free will” brain area

• research suggests that specific areas of the brain is involved in consciousness or just automatic

• Electrical stimulation makes patients repost a desire or intention to move part of their body and even feel they have moved it

• Contrasts with stimulating another area which makes patients move involuntarily and they can tell the difference

• So we can have free choices! Frontal cortex deliberates between possibilities, possibility decided on and the perinatal cortex generates intention and action

Scientific determinism - for and against

FOR

• closed universe

• Newtons laws of physics

• Libet experiment

• Biological determinism

AGAINST

• quantum physics

• Sirigus free will brain area

Quantum physics against scientific determinism

• they found out that it is impossible to know both where a particle is and where it is going. Only probabilities

• An observer can alter the way a particle behaves

• Things are not fixed or determined in a predictable way, random is wired into the universe

• Exact opposite of deterministic system

Psychological determinism- behaviourism- key people

• Pavlov

• Skinner

Carl rogers- humanistic psychology

• he believed people are free to create meaning for themselves

• Often people may need to re evaluate what gives their life importance- reconsider aspects of thei life and their own self image so they can find new meaning for their life

• Conscious task which requires effortful letting go of past habits

Biological determinism

Theory that human traits, behaviours and social roles are primarily dictated by innate biological factors like genes and physiology rather than environmental influences suggesting “nature” over “nurture”

Predestination - religious determinism,

The theory that all events are determined by the will of god - particularly, the final destiny of moral agents

God has already determined all things, we have no free will

God being omniscient - issues to free will

• god is all knowing, must know what happens therefore past present and future.

• Free will cannot exist

God being omniscient - for free will

• just because god knew we would do it doesn’t mean we didn’t have the free choices to do that, god did not make us do it

Augustine’s view o eternal salvation

• eternal life isn’t something we can naturally obtain

• No one can force the omnipotent god to give eternal life

• We have free will to be a good person in our life but the ultimate decision is still to god and not us

Concupiscence

Inclination or innate tendency of human beings to commit sin- we have a urge essentially

Concupiscence was not sin in itself, but a deprivation of good or a wounding of the ability to choose good and resist evil.

Massa peccati

Humanity as a ‘lump of sin’

We are incapable of achieving salvation by ourselves due to our sinful nature

Liberium abitrium

Free will as part of human nature

St Augustine - religious determinism

• focused on the human freedom and moral evil

• He sinned in his early life, confessed in sins and believed that god helped him on his journey of self reflection etc.

• His theology is an interplay of gods eternal, unchanging love and presence meeting human waywardness through grace

• God is totally in control → humans perfectly free

How does salvation happen for Augustine?

1- we all deserve to be damned under gods just anger as we are all seminally present in Adam

2- god mercifully chooses to save some- can’t blame him if he doesn’t save more

3- no election to damnation as such- most are simply left in the “Massa damnata” which is fair.

But he also believes there is also an interaction between Gods grace and our liberium arbitrium

1- gods grace- healing power over concupiscence - frees our freedom from original si, to make good choices

2- so healed grace nature is freer from sin, and this effectively predestines us to salvation

How does Augustine link human nature to salvation and predestination? 15 key points

1- foreknowledge: god merely chose those human beings who would freely believe in him

2- foreknowlege is not the same as compelling someone

3- Adam and Eve rebelled due to concupiscence

4- we have original sin and cannot abstain from committing sin on our own

5 this inability to abstain from sin is our second nature

6- we have lost moral liberty and freedom

7- gods inscrutable free choice, not ours. A such, we are judged in readiness for the afterlife not on our merit but his grace

8- the elect

9- irresistible grace

10- go to hell

11- gods just nature- through damnation and gods mercy through salvation

12- we were free only to sin so any pure behaviour is evidence of gods grace

13-god elects some to be saved and some to be damned

14- gods foreknowlege not his choices

15- we are still sinners deserving of being damned

Clarence Darrow- who was he

• born in Ohio 1857

• Studied law

• Well known for his clever speech and quick wit in the court room

What did Clarence Darrow believe

• We are not responsible for our hereditary or environment

• Only nature and nurture are to blame

• Crimes should be viewed in the same way as earthquake or hurricanes

The Leopold- loeb case

• 14 year old bobby franks was killed on his way home from school

• The murderers where soon caught and people where shocked to find there identities was two very intelligent teenagers from wealthy families

• Notes on the case are in notability.

Clarence Darrow - the Leopold and loeb case

• Darrow was their defendant

• He blamed the killing on multiple other factors not just the teenagers faults

• Nietzsche, college professors, hormones, detective novels, world war 1

• He gave a speech at the end which change a lot of peoples out look on philosophy

• In his speech he basically blamed the philosophy of neitzsche, that was taught by there college professors and basically placed them above of society.

• Darrow succeeded and got them off the death sentence

Soft determinism

Believe that there is some room for free will within a deterministic universe

2 things soft determinism affirms

1- we are completely determined, by causal factors

2- moral agents have an element of freedom despite being completely determined

Does soft determinism contradict itself? Response

No

1- we experience freedom: we feel we are free to choose. We do feel compelled to act in the way that we do

2- moral responsibility: we hold others responsible for their actions. We feel it is just and fair to give Blame and praise. Would not be possible unless we chose our actions freely

Harry Frankfurt

He argued that a person can still have control over what’s he does even when he couldn’t have done otherwise

-the example of the brainwashed election voters

These are known as Frankfurt cases- he essentially said we still had that decision to choose even if the outcome was determined it doesn’t take away from our choice

Patrica churchland

She argued that as social animals we cannot hep but hold people accountable

We also need to consider though how much control we have when making decisions or actions

For example i cannot blame you for sneezing because you have no control, however i can blame you for sneezing on my food.

She said asking the question ‘am i free is wrong but rather ‘how much control do i have’ the more control the ore responsible

“For it is not when my ____ has any cause at all, but only when it has ___ ___ of cause, that it ___to be free”

“For it is not when my action has any cause at all, but only when it has a special sort of cause, that it is reckoned to be free” -AJ Ayer

Evidence for soft determinism - AJ ayer

He was a logical positivist explaining the difference between hard and soft determinist.

• if someone restricts you, you would say you was coerced or forced

• If there was no external restrictions you would say that ‘something caused me to’ you do not say you was forced

This hows the level of freedom we still have, but still caused

Evidence for soft determinism - Thomas Hobbes

He explained soft determinism through the idea of internal and external forces

• an external force is an external factor that forces you to do only one thing. No other choices can be considered or actual. For example being pushed into the road

• Internal cause, is the result of your deliberation between possibilities and involves conscious acceptance. It is influence by internal factors like psychology, genes or laws of physics. We do not feel forced to do these things

‘All ____ actions have ___ causes”

“All actions have necessary causes” - hobbes

Libertarianism- value of blaming moral agents for immoral acts

• there is moral value in blaming someone for any immoral acts they commit.

• This is because the choice of whether to act morally or not is within a persons own free willed moral decision

• This is why Satre partly viewed free will as a curse because it comes with total moral responsibility

• Satre believed those who choose not to take moral responsibility are still making a free choice to do so

Libertarianism- the usefulness of normative ethics

• libertarianism upholds the usefulness of normative ethics

• The aim of all normative = ethics is to act as a moral guide

• With free will, humans can loose track of morality and that’s why we have normative ethics to act as a moral guide essentially.

Example of a normative ethic that supports libertarianism

Act utilitarianism

Bentham implies that in order to select a course of action they need to have free will

Elect

Those who have been predestined to be saved

Reprobate

Those who have been predestined to be damned

Atonement

Refers to the forgiving or pardoning of sin. This is achieved through the suffering, death and resurrection of jesus

Calvin- who was he

Lived in The 16th century centuries after Augustine

Calvin’s beliefs and view

-doctrine of predestination, he was trying to make its as a fact not a theology

Gods ordains eternal life for some, and ordains damnation for others

God, as sovereign, alone determines human fate; humans do not have free will to choose

Thought predestination was a mystery like Augustine

But the number of the elect is fixed, human choices cannot alter this

Inspires the wonder and fear of god

What does Calvin belive about predestination - 11 points

1- gods omnipotence, gods elections humans nature is damned

2- he did not accept free will- predestined

3- calvinist fatalism

4- humans are depraved because of original sin, can achieve nothing through our own merits

5- before birth

6- the elect cannot fail to be saved

7- god causes people to believe or not

8- those who have remained with Jesus Christ as the rest of humanity (the reprobates) are damned

9- there would be no difference between the believer or non believer. It is not a requirement of god to make salvation available, but to b judged on our faith

10-this would imply we are coauthors of life, putting us on oar with god, this takes away his omnipotence - but we cannot change our faith so god does have power

12- at death is a divine mystery

Five points of Calvinism- tulip

T- total depravity

U- unconditional election

L- limited atonement

I- irresistible grace

P- perseverance of the saints

Arminianists- disagree with Calvin- what id they say?

• Christ had died for us all, so gods grace was available to all

• Humans are still free to reject the offer of salvation, gods grace proceeds faith and the inspiration of good deeds, it does not guarantee it

T in tulip?

Total depravity of sinful human nature

U in tulip?

Unconditional election- humans are not elected on the basis of any reward or merit or quality of theirs

L in tulip?

Limited atonement- Christ died only for the elect

I in tulip

Irresistible grace- the elect are infallibly called and redeemed; they cannot sin

P in tulip?

Perseverance of the saints, cannot in any way deflect from their calling

What else supports predestination?

Theologically

Theologically- how does it support predestination

• predestination should be accepted as it supports correct theological beliefs about god

• God is sovereign and almighty

• Only god can bestow salvation- undeserved gift

• Predestination shows gods goodness and power in saving some

• Teaches holy fear and awe of god- appropriate

Theologically- how does it not support predestination

• should be rejected/ modified as it does not support correct theological beliefs about god

• God is all good: healing from original sin and restoring freedom

• God gave man dignity- to be good by own efforts “ man is not an automaton in the hands of god” (arminius)

• God must be just: fall not. Just if passed on to future generations

• God cannot be responsible for sin: but predestination effectively means he is

Sola scriptura

This si a reformation motto. If the bible does not support it, it cannot be a Christian belief.

However the bible is both for and against predestination

Romans 8:29 “those god foreknew, he predestined; those he predestined, he called; those he called, he also justified’ those he justified, he glorified” - support

Matthew 26:28 jesus said “ this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins”

Pelagius- who was he what did he believe

• free will

• Christian monk

• Declared a heretic

• Partially influenced by saint Justin

The role of original sin

• Pelagius theory, like Augustine, starts with an interpretation of ‘the fall’ of Adam and Eve- created ‘original sin’

• He argued an omnibenovolent god would not punish all of humanity for the sins of Adam and Eve

• Therefore in contrast to Augustine, he stated Adam’s sin only affected Adam and is not inherited

• ‘Parents are not to be put to death for their children, not children put to death for their parents’

Pelagius- religious concepts of free will

• the role of original sin, humanity maturing in gods image and accepting the responsibility of free will, free will as used to follow gods laws, the role of grace in salvation

Arminius- religious concepts of free will

-denial of predestination, the effect of original sin only affected free will, gods ‘prevenient’ grace in allowing humans to exercise free will, the elect and the possibility of rejecting gods grace, the election of believers being conditional on faith

Pelagius argument

• humanity does not inherit ‘original sin’

• We are not inflicted an overwhelming desire to sin

• ‘The fall’ can be seen as a good thing for humanity

• He wrote “if god has simply instructed Adam and Eve to eat from the tree, and they obeyed, they would have been acting like children. So, he forbade them from eating the fruit; this meant that they themselves had to make a free will decision, whether to eat or not to eat. Just as a young person needs to defy his parents in order to grow to maturity, so Adam and Eve needed to defy god in order to grow to maturity on his image”

Role of gods grace in salvation

• Pelagius argued that all “good works” were carried out only with the grace of god- however he saw gods grace as enabling, not forcing

• God is acting as a guide to do good works- god guides but within the straight of free will

Palgius view on sin with free will

• it is good that we can sin- because it emphasises the good that people do

• We do have free will to do good works- but when we do it s through gods guidance

• “Free will is in all good works always assisted by divine help”

Pelagius- universal atonement

• if people choose not to follow gods commandments- they can freely seek forgiveness and still achieve salvation

• This is because he said god grants atonement through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ to all those who freely choose to have faith in him

• He is therefore putting forward the idea of universal atonement

• Christs death was for forgiveness and humanity meaning all humanity can achieve salvation in heaven

If man can effect himself why is god and jesus needed? - Pelagius response

• universal atonement

• Grace given to all

• This grace is as external grace

• “Free will is in all good works always assisted by divine help”

Arminius what does he believe/ reject

He rejects

• universal atonement

• Man cooperates in his salvation

• Grace is resistible

Arminius view on original sin mean for freedom?

• It prevents us from acting freely

• Depraved and deprived freedom

• God predestines, but our freedom still counts

Arminius against Calvinism and predestination

• he believed god needed to be defended against Calvinism

• He believed predestination reduces humanity to gods pre programmed minions

• He believed if predestination was true then god is responsible for evil, gods will caused evil.

• “God might not be considered the author of sin, nor man an automation in the hands of god”

Arminius view of original sin on free will

• he thought original sin was a bad thing

• He argued all of humanity do inherit original sin from Adam

• Meaning humanities free will is compromised because we would all have a drive to sin