Determinism defined: Every event has a cause/set of causes; if its cause occurs, then the effect must follow. In the assigned reading by David Hume, Hume calls determinism the principle of necessity and claims that a belief in its truth is part of common sense. To give an example (mine, not his): when someone in the 20 s suddenly falls dead, we don t think well, sometimes things like that just happen. We think that the person s death must have had a cause. If the coroner is unable to identify the cause, we don t think that this is an uncaused death. Instead, we think that there must have been a cause, even if we can t identify it. According to determinism, our inability to make accurate predictions about some natural events (e.g. Will the hurricane now of the coast of Florida touch land, and if so where? What number will appear on the dice, on this craps player s next throw?) is due to our ignorance of the laws of nature and the causes that are in play. An hypothetical omniscient scientist who knew exactly what state a system is currently in, what inputs it is receiving, and what laws govern that system s behavior, would be able accurately to predict that system s future states. This holds for hurricanes, people, the solar system, and everything else in the universe. If determinism is true, then it follows that all of the choices that we make have causes; given those causes, we have to make the particular choices that we do. Determinism holds that just as a computer s outputs are caused by its inputs and the software that it s running, so too, every choice that we human beings make is caused by inputs we receive from the present environment and the beliefs, desires, and other psychological traits that we have. The difference between computers and people is that computers are much simpler, better understood, and so, predictable, whereas humans are more complex, not so well understood, and thus, less predictable. The reason why the choices of most people are hard to predict accurately is not that their choices are uncaused, but rather, that the causes are very complex. -data or info. being received from the current environment ( sensory inputs ) -genes + -decision to + -beliefs, desires & do x, not y or z. -upbringing, other psych. traits ( the outputs ) socialization, ( the brain s software ) learning -- Determinists can disagree about how important socialization is vs. how important biology/genes are. They can hold polar opposite views in the "nurture vs. nature" debate. For example: why are men more violent than women? In every known society, past and present, over 90% of all violent crimes are committed by males. Perhaps the explanation has to do with the differences between male and female brains ("nature"). Or perhaps the explanation is that in all societies men are taught to be "macho" and women to
be "feminine" ("nurture"), and macho upbringing leads to more violence than feminine upbringing. Either explanation is compatible with determinism. The definition of determinism does not say or imply either that we do or that we don t have free will. Whether or not free will is compatible with determinism being true can t be established just by examining that definition. One must also understand what is the correct definition of free will. (Of course, there s disagreement about what is the correct definition). -- Determinism differs from fatalism. Determinism says that the past determines the present and the present determines the future. Fatalism says that the future is cast in stone, or that many of the most important things that will happen to us tomorrow will happen no matter what we do today. 1 2 3 the past the choices we make what happens to us in the present in the future Fatalism says that 3 is fixed, that changing 2 won t make any difference to 3. For example, fatalism says that the grade you will get on your next exam on this class is fixed, so it doesn t matter whether you do the assigned reading and attend lecture between now and exam time or not. Determinism (and common sense) say otherwise. If you study hard, that s likely to cause a higher grade; if you blow off studying, that s likely to cause a poor performance and a lower grade. Of course determinism implies that your decision to study hard or blow it off has causes in your genetics and socialization, and given those causes, you have to make the decision that you do.
In order to determine whether or not free will is real, we have to know what the definition of it is (otherwise we won t know what to look for). So what is the definition of free will? Here are some commonsense points about what free will isn t and about who doesn t have it. A satisfactory theory or definition of free will must be consistent with all of these points: 1. We don t think that fish or even dogs have it. (That s why many would agree that a dog should be put down if it s dangerous, but few would say that it should be put down because it s evil. Moral evil requires the capacity for free will, which dogs lack). But neither does it seem that free will is something that only humans could possibly have. If there are Vulcans (from the Star Trek TV series) on a faraway planet, they would not be homo sapiens, but they would have free will. 2. We don t think that all humans have it. Not the brainwashed, the severely mentally retarded, the seriously mentally ill, or infants and very young children. 3. Free will is not to be identified with the ability to make choices, or the exercise of that ability. The ability to choose, and the exercise of that ability, is necessary but not sufficient for free will. It makes perfectly good sense to say that someone chose to do x, but lacked free will in making the choice. A brainwashed person might choose to try to assassinate the President, but if that choice is due to his having been brainwashed (via chemical injections, electric shocks, etc.), it is not the result of free will. 4. Free will is not indestructible. If someone has free will, he can lose it, either temporarily or permanently, via the ingestion of certain drugs (e.g. ones that cause psychotic delusions), severe mental illness, lobotomy, etc. 5. Free will is not to be confused with freedom. Being free is a matter of having lots of opportunities. If you re put in a prison cell, your options or opportunities are drastically reduced, and thus, your freedom is reduced. But your free will is unaffected. Free will (assuming it exists) seems to be a matter of having certain mental capacities including the capacity to weigh the pro s and con s of different options, and choose accordingly. It may be more than that, but it s at least that.
A menu of possible positions on free Will, determinism, and their relationship Let D stand for the statement determinism is true. Let F stand for the statement at least some of our choices we make of our own free will. We can now distinguish some of the different positions in this debate as follows. Compatibilism: D and F are compatible. That is, it is possible for both statements to be true simultaneously. (The relation between D and F is analogous to that between wearing a green shirt and wearing a striped shirt it s possible to do both). Incompatibilism: D and F are incompatible. It is impossible for both to be true. If one is true, then the other has to be false. (The relation between D and F is analogous to that between living in Arizona and living in Afghanistan it s impossible to do both at the same time). Incompatibilism can be defined in terms of an if-then statement, namely: If D, then not F. or If F, then not D. (These two conditional statements are equivalent; they re contrapositives. See p. 14 of our textbook). Libertarianism says: Hard determinism says: Soft determinism says: If F, then not D. (Incompatibilism) F not D. If D, then not F. (Incompatibilism) D not F. D F D & F It s possible that (D & F) (Compatibilism)