Test 3 for PHIL

✅ I. Personal Identity

Main Theories:

• Soul Theory (Gertler p.113; Darrow, pp.42-43; Hasker & Taliaferro, SEP)

  • You are your soul; identity persists through the same immaterial soul.

  • Objections: How do we know a soul is the same over time? How can we detect souls?

• Body/Brain Theory (Olson in SEP; The Human Animal; Quinlan case)

  • You are your living biological organism or brain.

  • Eric Olson: Personal identity is biological, not psychological.

  • Parfit's argument (pp.82–83): Questions importance of identity itself—what matters is psychological continuity, not identity.

• Psychological Theory (Locke):

  • You are your memories. Continuity of consciousness = personal identity.

  • Locke, p.48-50: Person ≠ same substance; you can change bodies, remain same person.

  • Perry (pp.54-61): Personal identity = memory links.

✅ II. Free Will and Determinism

1. Hard Line Determinism

• Key reading: D’Holbach, p.197

  • All actions are caused by prior events + natural laws → no free will.

• Support from Science:

  • Vaidman (Many Worlds Interpretation): Every event predetermined in multiverse.

  • Libet’s Neuroscience Experiment: Brain decides before we become aware.

  • Wegner: Free will is an illusion (illusion of conscious will).

• Against it: Moral responsibility seems to require free will.

2. Soft Line Determinism (Compatibilism)

• Stace (pp.220–221): Freedom = acting according to one's internal states (desires, motives), not external coercion.

• Can be determined and free.

• McKenna and Coates (SEP 2.1–2.2): Compatibilism allows moral responsibility.

• Stace’s Table on p.220: Shows examples of free vs. unfree actions.

3. Libertarian Free Will

• Not determined + responsible.

• Campbell, p.208-214:

  • Free will shown by “moral struggle” or going against inclination.

  • Inner experience reveals our freedom.

• Objections:

  • Nisbett and Wilson / Gopnik: Introspection is unreliable.

  • Clark, Capes, Swenson (SEP): Libertarianism assumes "agent causation" or “uncaused causes” – controversial.

  • Frankfurt Cases: Even if no alternate possibility, we can still be responsible.

📝 Sample Essay Prep

Sample Q:

(a) Explain hard determinism
(b) Contrast with soft determinism
(c) Scientific support for hard determinism
(d) Objections (moral responsibility)

Here's a basic outline:

(a)
Hard determinism = all events (including choices) are caused by prior events + laws of nature. No free will. (D’Holbach)

(b)
Soft determinism (Stace) = determinism is true, but we’re free if we act voluntarily—not coerced.

(c)
Scientific support:

• Libet: Brain acts before conscious awareness.

• Vaidman: Multiverse—no alternate paths.

• Wegner: Conscious choice is post-hoc illusion.

(d)
Objection: If determinism is true, how can we blame/praise anyone?

• Moral practices (punishment, reward) rely on some idea of choice.

• Compatibilists say acting on internal motives is enough for responsibility.