Free Will and Determinism

Summary

This 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

00:00

🍫 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.

05:00

🧠 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.

Keywords

💡Free Will

Free will refers to the ability to make choices freely, without external coercion. In the video, the character John believes he exercises free will when choosing a chocolate bar over an apple. The concept is central to the discussion, as it explores whether humans are genuinely free to make decisions or if their actions are determined by prior causes.

💡Determinism

Determinism is the idea that all events, including human actions, are determined by preceding causes. The video contrasts this view with free will, discussing how everything in the universe, including human behavior, could be the inevitable outcome of prior causes, going back to the Big Bang. Determinism raises questions about whether people are truly responsible for their actions.

💡Hard Determinism

Hard determinism is the belief that free will is an illusion and that all human actions are determined by external factors. The video uses the example of a man locked in a room who thinks he chooses to stay there, unaware that he cannot leave. This metaphor illustrates how hard determinists argue that choices may appear free but are actually predetermined by prior causes.

💡Libertarianism

In the context of the video, libertarianism refers to the belief in complete free will. John identifies as a libertarian when he asserts that he could have chosen the apple if he wanted. Libertarians argue that humans are fully free to make choices, and their actions are not determined by external causes.

💡Psychological Determinism

Psychological determinism suggests that human actions are determined by psychological factors such as emotions, feelings, and desires. In the video, the speaker argues that emotions like anger or affection cause actions, meaning that human behavior can be explained as a part of a causal chain governed by psychological laws, rather than being freely chosen.

💡Causality

Causality refers to the relationship between cause and effect, where an event is the result of a previous cause. The video emphasizes causality as a core component of determinism, arguing that every action, including human behavior, is the effect of a prior cause. This chain of cause and effect leads some to argue that free will cannot exist.

💡Compatibilism (Soft Determinism)

Compatibilism, or soft determinism, is the view that free will and determinism can coexist. In the video, the speaker introduces this idea by suggesting that while all actions are causally determined, people still act according to their internal desires. The concept helps reconcile the idea that humans can be responsible for their actions, even if those actions are influenced by prior causes.

💡Internal Causes

Internal causes refer to actions driven by personal desires or will, as discussed in the context of compatibilism. In the video, choosing the chocolate bar is an example of an internal cause, as it stems from John's desire. The concept distinguishes between freely made decisions and those influenced by external factors.

💡External Causes

External causes refer to actions that are influenced or forced by external factors, such as coercion. In the video, external causes are contrasted with internal causes to explain how determinism may still allow for moral responsibility. For instance, if someone is forced to act due to external pressure, it is not an expression of free will.

💡Omniscience

Omniscience is the attribute of having complete knowledge of everything, including future events. In the video, God's omniscience is discussed in relation to determinism. The argument is that if God knows all future actions, then those actions are predetermined, which poses a challenge to the idea of free will within religious contexts.

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