freedom

FREE WILL-FREEDOM:

We constantly must make decisions and then question whether we made the right choice.
Assumption of FREE WILL: nothing determines my decision irrevocably until the very moment I take it.

Key Concepts:

Free Will: The ability to make choices and decisions that are not determined by prior causes.
Determinism: The theory that all events, including human actions, are determined by preceding events in accordance with natural laws.
Fate: The idea that events are predetermined and inevitable, often by some higher power or cosmic plan.

FREEDOM AND MORALITY.

According to David Hume morality has nothing to do with us being responsible for our actions. He believed we didn’t have a special moral responsibility for our actions. Morality is more about desire and emotion-about our states of motivation and feelings that pave the way for our actions and cause us to perform them. Mortality is primarily about being a virtuous person. Doing the right thing is secondary and something that comes because of being this virtuous person.

We cannot understand morality and moral responsibility without the appeal to freedom.

CONCEPECTUAL FREE WILL:

EVALUATIVE FREE WILL:

WE FEEL MORAL RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE CHOICES. When we decide something, we don’t think there is something that could have gone wrong. Our sense of agency when we are morally responsible for what we choose. We weigh up our choices and after we reflect on it.
When you decide you are morally responsible because there is an alternative. However, when there is no other choice, you cannot be held morally responsible.

BUT HOW FREE ARE WE REALLY?

Not in control of your gene arrangement or the family you were born into, or environment you have to grow up in. for example having a tumour or something in your brain that affects your behaviour. is it you specifically or your brain?

Genos- any change in your DNA can have effects on you.

Determinism: -Theory of Determinism: -

If one moment is determined, then the moments after will also be determined.

Fate and determinism…

Link between cause and effect is subjective to natural laws. Nothing just happens “by itself”.

Any existing state/event is unavoidable effect of preceding states.

If this theory was right, then we wouldn’t have many choices to choose from- it would be fixed. Everything would be set out.

If determinism is true, you choose because a chain of preceding states, including your desires, brain states; caused you to choose it.

Thus, you could not not have chosen A rather than B; under the same circumstances you would always choose A and never B.

NO “ALTERNATIVES”.

Determinism could have some sense of relief. When you regret a decision.

First response to this deterministic world. Can we contest this deterministic interpretation?

There is a huge chance of randomness and chance.

Not everything is determined. unpredictability is not free will

Free will does not simply mean “something just happened randomly.

Dilemma: as determinism is true, we are not responsible for our actions. But if its false we are also not responsible for our actions.

We reject this picture because we feel free. Not only are we free but responsible. Subjective experience of freedom. Rejecting determinism but inflicting moral responsibility.

Casal determinism: states that everything that happens including our own actions has already been casually determined to happen. If this is true, then whatever happens in the future is already determined and whatever we “choose” to do will lead us to that one determined outcome. Naturally we think this theory removes our freedom.

Simple terms: we think that we have free will, but if everything has been determined and set out to happen-are we really free? This is known as Incompatibilism- argues that free will and determinism are mutually exclusive- in other words, if the universe is deterministic (meaning that everything that happens is the result of prior causes), then we can't have free will.

Is free will an illusion? Schopenhauer “on the freedom of the will” 1839- man in the street/water

Some form of “freedom” seems necessary for “moral responsibility” when we challenge freedom we challenge the concept of moral responsibility

Key philosophical areas:

epistemology [knowledge]
metaphysics [TIME, SPACE, GOD, REALITY]
ethics [ good/bad]
aesthetics [art+beauty]
political philosophy

But what form? And how is this relevant “freedom” relate to determinism?
Incompatibilism-]: involves the ability to have done otherwise. is the denial of the ability to have done otherwise.
freedom [ in a sense necessary for moral responsibility
- Determinism:
This is known as Incompatibilism- argues that free will and determinism are mutually exclusive- in other words, if the universe is deterministic (meaning that everything that happens is the result of prior causes), then we can't have free will.

Central positions:

LIBERTATARIANISM:

Freedom [ in the sense necessary for moral responsibility]: involves ability to have done otherwise. – we are able to do otherwise; determinism is false.

Libertarians are incompatibilist that believe we are really free. Believe that we actually choose to make choices and its not based on things that happened in the past.

Libertarianism, and so too Incompatibilism with it, is our natural theory of freedom.

if we werent free we wouldnt be held responsible.

DETERMINISM VS RANDOMNESS/chance:

Determinism says that if everything is predestined then we cannot be free.

If determinism is false and our actions are not predestined, then it seems our actions would be based on chance. But chance does not give us freedom. - WHY?

Because if our actions are random, we don’t control them, meaning we did not choose them. If a process is random, it means it is out of our control. If they are just random and undetermined then they can’t be real actions- just blind emotions.

So the issue is- if everything is predetermined, we cannot be free. But if our actinons are based on chance, we still cannot be free. -in other words; determinism takes away our control and chance does not provide us with any control.

COMPATIBILISM:

Determinism doesn't eliminate desires and intentions: Even if our choices are determined, they are still based on our own desires, values, and intentions.
Free will is about self-expression: Compatibilists argue that free will is about expressing our own desires, values, and intentions, even if they are determined.
Determinism can provide a sense of control: If our choices are determined by our own desires and intentions, we can still feel in control of our actions.

we can assert that we are free for moral responsibility and we can be determinist.

Consequentialist> what is the consequence?

thinking of what the effect will be of what you do. what do they have to say about moral responsibility?

their idea would be- moral responsibility should we do it? what are the consequences? we use consequentialist justifications for punishments. The practice for moral responsibillity only requires whether it is going to work. [ will they do it again?]

Deny “freedom” is necessary for moral responsibillity.

moral responsibillity is justified by outcomes. [ no “freedom” required]

even if we aren’t free, moral responsibility can be useful and therefore justified.

-do what brings about the best outcomes.

what can this justify in terms of punishment? - anything. the ends justify the means. if it is a great outcome then anything can justify. our moral instinct is backward-looking. we look at what they did. question about the past, we dont look at the outcome.

we think about how crucial it is to punish and if it is deserved. Consequentialists dont see it this way.

MORE ROBUST FORM OF COMPATIBILISM, WHICH DOES NOT RELY ON CONSEQUENTIALISM.

so far, we have been relying on a theory of freedom necessary for moral responsibility-

Frankfurt’s compatibilism:

black is an evil neurosurgen-implanted a device in gunmar. watches him and wants him to kill Ridley. if he doesn’t then he presses a button and Gunmar kills ridley. doesn’t have to press bc g kills r humself. IS G RESPONSIBLE FOR KILLING HIM?

note there was no alternative. black is considered a hypothetical intervener.

theories, counter-examples and responses.

overarching theory: the relevant freedom involves the ability to do otherwise.

Frankfurts thought experiment provides contour-examples

proposing a different overarching theory of the relevant freedom.

cant do otherwise, we assume they not acting for their own reasons- being manipulated, forced…

they go together all the time. you can act and do something that you wanted to even if there was no alternative. doesnt align with not being able to do otherwise.

FREE WILL SKEPTICS:

Freedom [ in the sense necessary for moral responsibility]: involves ability to have done otherwise

We are not able to do otherwise; determinism is true.

Therefore, we are not free in the sense necessary for moral responsibility.

the whole practice we have of could’ve and guilt and shame. this thing that is so crucial maybe it is unjustified. we not free in the way we need to be in order to be responsible. - incompatibilist.

WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN CHAPTER 6-THOMAS NAGEL

EXPLORES THEMES OF Determinism and indeterminism-

Thomas explores that our notion or idea of free will is incompatible with determinism and indeterminism. He says that determinism undermines free will because if everything is predetermined then we are bound to choose something and we don’t really have free will of that choice. On the other hand he explains that indeterminism does not guarantee free will because random or uncaused events don’t give us freedom. If something happens by chance then we did not have the freedom to choose to do it. THE PROBLEM OF FREE WILL- it requires being in control of our choices, but determinism rules it out. – requires randomness that is introduced by indeterminism, but it does not provide the control we want. In conclusion, he points out that we need to rethink our idea of free will and freedom.