Free Will

The Problem of Free Will

• Generated by the following three claims:
  1. Principle of Causal Determinism
     • Every event $E$ that occurs is causally determined by prior conditions, such that, given those conditions $E$ had to occur
     • General to every event, including all human actions
  2. Principle of Alternative Possibilities
     • In order for an action to be freely chosen, one must have been able to do otherwise
  3. At least some actions are freely chosen
• Not all of the above claims can be true at the same time
  • Have to reject at least one
  • Which of the three claims are you most willing to give up?

Possible Responses

Hard determinism

• Accepts PCD and PAP but rejects free will
  • Determinism is true and therefore we lack free will
  • Free will is just an illusion
• Either an action is causally determined or not
  • If an action is causally determined...
    • You could not have done otherwise
    • In order for it to have been freely chosen, you must've been able to do otherwise
    • You couldn't do otherwise so the action was not freely chosen
  • If an action is not causally determined...
    • Then it was random (not up to you)
    • For an action to be freely chosen, the decision to perform it must be up to you
    • You didn't choose the action
  • Whether an action is causally determined or not, no action is ever freely chosen
• Argues against agent causation
  • Introspection can't give you all the details of what lead you to your choice
  • We could still punish criminals even if their actions were causally determined
    • Punishment will causally determine less crime is committed

Soft determinism (compatibilism)

• Accepts PCD and free will but rejects PAP
  • Determinism is true but we still have free will
• All human actions could be causally determined but some could count as free actions
• There is a confusion at the root of free will
  • Problem of free will is a verbal dispute
• Free act vs unfree act
  • As defined by Walter Stace
    • A free act is one whose immediate causes are psychological states of the agent
    • An unfree act is one whose immediate causes are states of affairs external to the agent
  • As defined by David Hume
    • A person is free if and only if both of the following are met:
      • THe person is acting in pursuit of what she desires and her actions are a result of her decisions
      • There are no obstacles in the person's way which prevent her from acting as she chooses
  • Refined definition
    • An agent acts freely if and only if both of the following are met:
      • The agent is moved to perform act $A$ by a desire to do $A$
      • The agent wants this desire to be the one that moves them to act

Libertarianism

• Accept PAP and free will but rejects PCD
  • Free will exists but it's different than what the compatibilist says
  • If determinism is true, we lack free will
    • But we have free will and determinism is false
• Not related to the political term
• Free agents are capable of causing their own actions in a special way
  • Agent causation
• The Descent Problem
  • Indeterminism does not imply the existence of free will
    • Does uncaused randomness really help?
  • The determining factor of choosing an action is the agent
    • Agent --> uncaused cause of the action
• Argues against soft deterministic view with the hypnotism case
  • Hypnotism --> hypnotist can get you into a state to control your beliefs and desires
  • If the soft deterministic view allows for internal states to be influenced by external factors, then it seems invalid

Philosophy