Free Will and Determinism
Summary
TLDRThis video explores the philosophical debate between free will and determinism. It begins with a discussion of libertarian free will, exemplified by the choice between a chocolate bar and an apple, and contrasts it with hard determinism, which claims that all actions are predetermined by causality. The discussion includes John Locke's analogy of a man in a locked room, psychological determinism, and the problem of moral responsibility. The video concludes by examining soft determinism (compatibilism), which reconciles free will with determinism by distinguishing between internal and external causes.
Takeaways
- 🍫 The discussion begins with a choice between a chocolate bar and an apple, used to illustrate the concept of free will.
- 🗽 John believes he chose freely, illustrating a libertarian view of free will, where individuals have the freedom to make their own choices.
- 🔒 A counterargument from hard determinism is introduced using John Locke's locked room analogy, suggesting that free will may be an illusion.
- 🔁 Hard determinism is linked to the universal theory of causation, which posits that every event is caused by a prior event, including human actions.
- 🔬 The discussion touches on scientific principles like chaos theory and Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, challenging the idea of a completely determined universe.
- 😔 Hard determinism argues that human emotions and actions are part of a complex causal chain, influenced by factors like society, upbringing, and environment.
- ⚖️ A moral dilemma arises: if actions are predetermined, it questions the justification for punishing or praising individuals for their actions.
- 🛡️ The soft determinist viewpoint, or compatibilism, is introduced as a middle ground, suggesting that free will and determinism can coexist.
- 🧠 Compatibilism differentiates between internal causes (desires) and external causes (coercion), arguing that internal causes allow for moral responsibility.
- 🤔 The video concludes with a debate on whether compatibilism successfully reconciles free will and determinism, acknowledging ongoing philosophical disagreements.
Q & A
What is the main topic discussed in the video?
-The main topic discussed in the video is the debate between free will and determinism in philosophy.
What example is used to introduce the concept of free will?
-The example of choosing between a chocolate bar and an apple is used to introduce the concept of free will.
How does the libertarian view free will in the chocolate and apple example?
-The libertarian believes they freely chose the chocolate bar and could have chosen the apple if they wanted, asserting that their decision was based on free will.
What analogy does John Locke use to explain determinism?
-John Locke uses the analogy of a man locked in a room who believes he can leave but chooses to stay, not realizing the door is locked. This demonstrates the illusion of free will.
What role does the universal theory of causation play in the determinist argument?
-The universal theory of causation supports determinism by arguing that all events, including human actions, have a cause and are part of a predetermined causal chain.
How does chaos theory challenge hard determinism?
-Chaos theory and Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle suggest that at a fundamental level, parts of the material world may behave randomly, implying not all events are predetermined.
What is psychological determinism?
-Psychological determinism argues that human actions are shaped by emotions and feelings, which are influenced by factors like society, upbringing, and environment, making actions predictable.
What is a major moral issue with hard determinism?
-A major issue with hard determinism is that if all actions are determined, it challenges the idea of moral responsibility, raising questions about punishing or praising individuals for their actions.
How does soft determinism or compatibilism attempt to reconcile free will and determinism?
-Soft determinism, or compatibilism, argues that while all actions have causes, there are internal and external causes. Internal causes, which align with one's desires, still allow for free will, even if shaped by external factors.
How does soft determinism address moral responsibility?
-Soft determinism holds that individuals are morally responsible because their actions arise from internal causes (personal desires), even if those desires are influenced by external factors.
Outlines
🍫 The Illusion of Free Will: Chocolate Bar vs. Apple
The discussion begins with a scenario where one person is offered a choice between a chocolate bar and an apple. The individual chooses the chocolate bar, leading to a debate on whether this decision was made out of free will or if it was predetermined. The concept of libertarianism, which upholds free will, is introduced, as well as the opposing view of hard determinism, which argues that free will is an illusion. John Locke’s analogy of a man in a locked room, who believes he is free to leave but unknowingly cannot, is used to explain the illusion of choice.
🧠 Cause and Effect: Determinism in Nature
The focus shifts to the concept of determinism, rooted in the universal theory of causation. The idea that every event in the universe is determined by prior causes is discussed, drawing from scientific observations. According to this view, if one could know the exact position of all particles, they could predict every future event. This extends to human actions, which are argued to be bound by cause and effect, just like any other physical event in nature. The discussion links this concept to the Big Bang, suggesting that all human behavior could be traced back to a determined chain of events set in motion by the universe’s origin.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Free Will
💡Determinism
💡Hard Determinism
💡Libertarianism
💡Psychological Determinism
💡Causality
💡Compatibilism (Soft Determinism)
💡Internal Causes
💡External Causes
💡Omniscience
Highlights
Introduction to the debate between free will and determinism, beginning with a choice between a chocolate bar and an apple.
The libertarian view on free will: the belief that individuals are free to choose their actions without external coercion.
Hard determinism explanation: actions are predetermined by prior causes, making free will an illusion.
John Locke’s analogy of the man locked in a room, unaware that his free will is restricted, used to explain how determinism can deceive people into believing they have free will.
Universal theory of causation and its argument that everything, including human actions, follows a chain of cause and effect.
Science’s role in determinism: the predictability of natural events and its parallel to human behavior being determined by prior causes.
Chaos theory and Heisenberg’s principle challenge determinism by introducing randomness, though hard determinists argue these events are not truly random but simply misunderstood.
Psychological determinism: human emotions like anger and affection are caused by a chain of events, further reinforcing that actions are determined.
External factors like society, culture, and environment play a significant role in shaping feelings and behavior, according to hard determinism.
Criticism of hard determinism: questioning the fairness of holding people morally accountable if all actions are predetermined.
Clarence Darrow’s legal defense using hard determinism to argue diminished responsibility, showing its real-world implications in law.
Religion's dilemma with determinism: the challenge of reconciling God’s omniscience with human free will.
Introduction to soft determinism (compatibilism): accepting determinism while still maintaining a degree of free will through internal desires and causes.
David Hume’s explanation of soft determinism, emphasizing internal desires as the driving force behind human action, allowing for moral responsibility.
Soft determinism’s balance between free will and determinism, allowing for personal responsibility while acknowledging external influences.
Transcripts
[Music]
hello and welcome to philosophy by the
website where we discuss and debate
different philosophical ideas today
we're going to be looking at a very
fascinating topic within philosophy and
that is freewill determinism right then
let's begin John in my hands I have a
chocolate bar and an apple I'm offering
you one what would you like I'll take
the chocolate bar okay great
tell me your choice right now did you
freely choose that was that through your
own free will
yes of course okay so you're a
libertarian you believe in free will you
believe you were free to choose what you
wanted yes exactly so then what makes
you so sure you have free will because
if I wanted to I could have chosen the
Apple nothing forced me to choose the
chocolate bar I chose it because I
wanted it I was free to choose either
okay if you wanted to you could have
chosen the Apple oh you didn't you chose
the chocolate so how do you know you
were free to choose the Apple what makes
you so sure that the choice just now
wasn't predetermined that it was only
going to end in one way that you were
never in fact free to choose that is
what the hard determinist believed that
people have no free will that free will
was just an illusion John Locke
explained it perfectly imagine a man
locked in a room he doesn't know it's
locked and he believes he can leave at
any time but as it happens he just
doesn't feel like leaving he loves the
room now if you were to ask him he would
tell you he has free will and he has
chosen to stay in the room not knowing
the room is locked and he physically
couldn't have the other choice his free
will is an illusion so why would a hard
determinist argue this of what they
basing these beliefs on well one way is
by focusing on the universal theory of
causation so we can see in our universe
that everything is down to cause an
effect all events have a cause and if we
don't know the causes because we haven't
discovered it yet now through studying
science we can see in our physical
nature every cause has a determined
effect the way an event turns out is
completely determined by its prior cause
that is how we learn from science we
make observations by
the determined effect of a particular
course and so theoretically if you could
see every particle and the way it was
moving you could predict everything that
would ever happen hmm
now our human actions are caused by
something and our human actions go on to
cause another effect
so if our human actions are also bound
by cause and effect is it not right to
argue that these two are causally
determined just like the laws of nature
think about it everything in our
physical universe has been caused by
something and scientists say this leads
right back to the Big Bang why can't we
then agree that when the Big Bang
happened it set in motion a series of
causal chains each one with a determined
path and this includes human behavior
whoa okay let's hold on one second
recently scientists have done
substantial work on the chaos theory and
Heisenberg's principle and they have
seen we cannot know the position and
path of every particle on a certain
level parts of the material world just
come into existence and change randomly
with no cause well to that I would just
say what I mentioned above just because
you don't know the course does not mean
it's not there even Einstein said God
does not play dice the world is causally
determined and the random and I'll
caused events that we may witness could
just be lack of knowledge of their
causes well I still don't think the hard
determinist is basing his logic on a
sound argument I can understand that all
actions have a cause and so within the
material world everything is causally
determined by the laws of nature however
when it comes to human actions there is
something more as human actions of the
result of the conscious thinking being
so human actions are done with reason
behind them not because they're in some
causal chain okay yes reason well the
hard determinist does in fact look at
psychological determinism we know human
actions of the result of how someone
feels the reason you hit someone was
because you felt angry the reason you
kiss someone was because you felt
affection so hard determinist believe
that human feeling and emotion are
themselves part of a complex causal
chain governed by psychological law
each one able to describe the cause and
effect of human actions there are many
factors that may shape someone's feeling
or emotions things like society culture
upbringing environment or play a part in
shaping our feelings and therefore
determining our actions so again
everyone's actions are theoretically
predictable as our feelings are just the
inevitable result of a complex chain of
causes well there seems to be a big
problem with that idea okay fine I'll
bring in an environment we have no
choice in and these things do contribute
a lot to our psychology however if the
hard determinist claim that this
determines all our actions and we have
no freedom then why should we ever
punish someone for committing an evil
act or praise someone for doing a good
act if everyone is following an
inevitable path they are just doing what
they are destined to do so why should we
hold them accountable well that's a good
point and this argument has come up in
the course of law many times there was
the case with Clarence Darrow he was a
lawyer defending to criminals who argued
diminished responsibility based on the
fact that they did not choose this but
their actions were determined well then
where does this leave religion how can
God punish the bad and reward the good
if we have no choice in our actions
that's not the only thing religion has
to worry about hard determinists also
argue that a belief in God supports the
hard determinist theory how well you
raised this point in the problem of evil
argument the idea that God's omniscience
means that we don't have free will if
God knows everything then he can see
into the future and if he can see into
the future
he knows how an event is going to turn
now if he can see how an event is going
to turn out then it can only turn out
that way and no other way so it's
determined yes I remember so if God can
see that a particular man is going to be
a murderer then he can see that this man
is going to be a murderer before he has
even created him so effectively this man
is a murderer before he's even been born
how is he then free not to be a murderer
okay okay let's leave God's omniscience
to one side now I agree that there are
external factors that shape people
thoughts and feelings and therefore
contribute to one's behavior and actions
but I don't feel like people should not
be held responsible for their actions I
think we can make a way for free will
and determinism to be compatible really
how well why don't we take a soft
determinist viewpoint also known as
compatibilism so what's that okay what
if I say that I fully accept the hard
determinist theory of universal
causation and because of this all our
actions are determined however although
everything is caused we should
acknowledge that there are two different
types of causes we have internal causes
and external causes internal causes are
actions caused because of inner desire
or will like me choosing the chocolate
over the Apple external causes are
actions that are forced or coerced by
something external like the police
forcing someone into prison yeah I got
it so then when you say that someone
acted out free will we mean that their
actions were the result of internal
causes yes but internal causes were
themselves caused by external causes yes
fine the soft determinist would agree
with that and with psychological
determinism however although our
internal causes are shaped by nature
environment upbringing in society
ultimately we make the choices that
follow our personal desire we could have
chosen differently it was possible
determinism is different from fatalism
we aren't bound to one choice it's just
that our choices were driven by internal
causes Navy Hume explained it as the
power of acting according to the
determinations of the will that is if we
choose to remain at rest we may if we
choose to move we also may so when we
say someone does not have free will we
mean that their actions are being forced
externally when we say someone does have
free will we are saying that they are
making choices through their own
internal desires these internal desires
are shaped by external factors
nonetheless the person is ultimately
making the choice and acting through
freedom this is also defined as the
liberty of spontaneity right I get it so
then if we take the soft determinants
point of view and say our actions are
caused internally we can hold people
morally responsible when they do
something wrong our choices ultimately
come from internal desires so this does
make us responsible soft determinism can
therefore allow us to punish criminals
rather than just dismiss their actions
as something they could not control also
it better explains why we believe we are
free if we accept that we have freedom
to choose we don't have to be so extreme
and say free will is a complete illusion
this seems more plausible so overall I
think soft intermón ism brings both free
will and determinism at a perfect amount
to explain human actions I don't know if
I'd necessarily agree with that I still
find it a contradiction to argue that
free will and determinism are compatible
for me it doesn't add up there to a
complete opposite of each other but
anyway that's all we got time for now
thank you for watching we hope you
enjoyed the vibe and please check out
the website for some other videos
Ver Más Videos Relacionados
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)