Free Will Part 3 Combatibilism & Incombatibilism

Although supposedly contrary ideas there are 2 groups of ideas for this, there are combatibilism where the 2 could coexist with one another and incompatibilism where they cannot. In incompatibilism there is an even split between those who believe in free will and those who hold a hardcore deterministic view, this viewpoint is more properly known as Hard determinism. This contains many different sub-categories but mainly has to deal with problem that free will is completely incompatible with determinism such that it simple cannot and does not exist. One sub category is Theological determinism, where the future and all events

that will occur past the present have already been laid out by some higher power or deity. The problem that arises from this – that many of my both religious and non-religious friends could not see when I tried to point it out to them – is how could our “free willed” actions be truly free of influences if all of our choices has already been determined prior to which we consciously make them by a god of sorts. I remember the frustration I experienced when I tried to explain that if a ‘plan’ by God existed that had all of our choice laid out ahead of us, that we could not experience free will. For in my opinion, having true free will would have to involve being
able to change the events in the ‘plan’ but in doing so, the plan could therefore not exist. Wow, I guess I found out what side I currently lie on, or maybe not, perhaps I should wait till I finish reading the compatibilistic viewpoints. Such a belief as incompatiblilistics could uproot both the ethics and moral roots of human behavior. As the common conceit it that free will is necessary for any kind of responsibility, so when this incompatiblistic idea is applies to morals, well then we are no longer responsible for the ethical actions performed in societies. One of the foundational ideas of good morality was the act of doing the right thing no matter what. However, hard determinists will not dismiss moralities along with the punishment of said actions. They will still hold those accountable of their actions despite the idea that they did not have control over them. Because the actions of this agent – the court and the people/victims of the wrongdoings – are also subject to the determined paths and therefore also do not have any control of their actions to punish the criminal. So no one is really doing any true wrong doings for no one in this closed system has any will so no one is really to blame, making it ok to punish still.

Article Written By GDop26

RIT student

Last updated on 22-07-2016 93 0

Please login to comment on this post.
There are no comments yet.
A Great Chips To Watch Your Movie
Misunderstanding: The Basic Cause Of Conflict Between Islam And America