4F - The Implications of Libertarianism and Free Will

What are the two implications that the spec requires you to analyse?

What are the two implications that the spec requires you to analyse?

⇨ The implications of libertarianism on moral responsibility
⇨ The implications of free will on religious belief

[Libertarianism, Moral responsibility] Outline the general response to the worth of human ideas of rightness, wrongness, and moral value.

⇨ Implications for moral responsibility = primarily polar opposite of determinism
- ∴ an agent's moral life = free from determining factors

⇨ Only conclusion = that human ideas of rightness, wrongness, and moral value = meaningful

[Libertarianism, Moral responsibility] Give supporting evidence from Jean-Paul Sartre to the notion that human ideas of rightness, wrongness, and moral value are meaningful.

⇨ Condemned to freedom

⇨ "man must rely upon his own fallible will and moral insight. He cannot escape choosing"

⇨ "man is not free not to be free"

⇨ Moral value = result of a human being's 'willed' moral choice

[Libertarianism, Moral responsibility] Give supporting evidence from Sirigu and Jirtle to the notion that human ideas of rightness, wrongness, and moral value are meaningful.

⇨ The further science examines evidence, the more it points towards humans having free will (e.g. through epigenetic switches)

[Libertarianism, Moral responsibility] Give supporting evidence from Pelagius to the notion that human ideas of rightness, wrongness, and moral value are meaningful.

⇨ "our most excellent creator wished us to be able to do either good or bad"
⇨ "this very capacity to do evil is also good [...] Because it makes the good part better by making it voluntary

[Libertarianism, Moral responsibility] Give supporting evidence from Arminius to the notion that human ideas of rightness, wrongness, and moral value are meaningful.

⇨ "God has limited his control in correspondence with man's freedom"

⇨ Holy Spirit does not force its 'will' onto humans ∵ the vital part of the process us that a human being makes a free-willed choice to decide not to rebel

⇨ However, some may view Arminius' argument as watering down the worth of human ideas of rightness/wrongness ∵ Holy Spirit acts as a moral guide; the ideas do not come from the agent's own 'will'

[Libertarianism, Moral responsibility] What is the value in blaming human beings for immoral acts?

⇨ Morally fair to punish people ∵ the choice of whether to be moral = within an agent's own 'willed' moral control

⇨ Sartre: total free will = total responsibility - curse
- Even those who did not wish to take responsibility are still making a free choice

[Libertarianism, Moral responsibility] In the UK legal system, there is a framework called 'rational choice theory'.
What is this?

⇨ The belief that humans are reasoning actors who freely weigh up costs/benefits and ∴ make freely willed rational choices when committing illegal acts
- 2011 riots, 1566 people punished - "deliberately participate"

[Libertarianism, Moral responsibility] What is the usefulness of normative ethics?

⇨ Libertarianism upholds use of normative ethics ∵ act as a moral guide, helping a person to use their free will to manoeuvre down path of morality
- without a normative ethic to guide, people may become amoral

⇨ Divine Command Theory
- God's commands act as a moral guide
- Concede that the use of human free-willed reason = reduced ∵ people do not need to use their own reason to rationalise morality - it is provided for them

⇨ Act utilitarianism
- Bentham: pre-supposing with principle of utility that humans have the free will to select the course of action that maximises happiness
- ∴ has free will to make a choice

[Free will, Religious belief] How is God shown not to be omnipotent?

⇨ According to Augustine, Pelagius' theories made it possible for a human to freely decide whether to be morally good or sinful
- ∴ a human = able to tell an omnipotent deity whether to give them salvation
- Augustine argued that this = an intolerable denial of God's omnipotence + an insult to his divine majesty
- Supported by Jonathan Edwards: concept of free will = incompatible with individual dependence on an omnipotent God ∵ if a human could choose, it diminishes God's omnipotence

⇨ Sartre: free will illustrates "There is no God"

[Free will, Religious belief] How is God shown to be omnibenevolent?

⇨ Supports omnibenevolence ∵ possible for all to achieve salvation by freely following God's laws

⇨ Pelagius: when Adam + Eve ate forbidden fruit, God did not punish all humans
- Would not punish all ∵ it was through no direct fault of their own - it was Adam + Eve's sin alone

⇨ Predestination makes humans pre-programmed robots

[Free will, Religious belief] What is the use of prayer?

⇨ Free will supports the meaningfulness of prayer ∵ it = used to build a rapport with God

⇨ Can seek forgiveness or guidance - consistent with free will

⇨ Pelagius: a human ≠ able to fulfil God's eternal moral law without divine aid
- "free will is [...] always assisted by divine help"
- This divine aid to guide to guide humans can be enhanced with prayer ∵ a human opens themselves up to the guiding light of the divine
- Forgiveness from free-willed decisions can be granted through prayer

[Free will, Religious belief] What are the implications for the existence of miracles?

⇨ If God has granted free will, it raises questions about his intervention through miracles

⇨ In both types of Aquinas' miracles (primary and secondary), God influences the outcome

⇨ E.g. Joshua 10:13 - God made the sun/moon stand still so that Joshua could defeat the enemies of Israel
- Determining the outcome of a major event with a miracle
- Overrides free will decisions of those involved

⇨ ∴ free will ≠ compatible with miracles

[Free will, Religious belief] What is the link between God and evil?

⇨ It defends God against the accusation that he + "the author of all sin"
- Pelagius: "this very capacity to do evil is also good [...] Because it makes the good part better by making it voluntary and independent"

⇨ However, perhaps God = responsible for all evil ∵ all sin manifested by an imperfect moral agent = ultimately the responsibility of its creator
- If omniscient, would have known about evil

[Free will, Religious belief] How does the Irenaean theodicy support the view that God is not "the author of all sin"?

⇨ God created humans imperfect, enabling them to actualise the qualities of God's perfection e.g. a sense of morality

⇨ To actualise these qualities of God's perfection, humans must make free, moral decisions - good works develop the agent into God's likeness

⇨ Analogy: God = craftsman working with humans as his material - suggests that humans should freely allow themselves to be moulded into God's likeness

⇨ Humans used their free will to disobey God, causing moral evil to develop, but this is not God's responsibility

⇨ Moral evil = necessary part of life - without it, decisions would have no value

⇨ "second-order goods" e.g. courage/perseverance could never be developed if there were not challenges in life that tested such goods
- ∴ if God intervened, it would compromise human freedom + prevent humans having the potential to develop into God's likeness

[Free will, Religious belief] How does Hick support the view that God is not "the author of all sin"?

⇨ God has to also allow natural evil

⇨ The natural world could not be a paradise ∵ would be no chance of causing harm ∴ humans would not be truly free to choose
- It would be too easy to be like God in paradise
- "Our world is not designed to maximise human pleasure but for the purpose of soul-making"

[Free will, Religious belief] How is God shown to be omnipotent?

⇨ Could be argued that God shows his omnipotent nature in other ways. E.g.:
- Arminius: Placing Holy Spirit as a guide within humans encourages good works; only an omnipotent God could do this

[Free will, Religious belief] How is God shown not to be omnibenevolent?

⇨ If omniscient, would have known we would do evil with our God-given free will (e.g. Holocaust) but he gave it to us anyway