FinalShortEssayE

docx

School

McGill University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

617

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

3

Uploaded by MegaCrownTarsier30

Report
1 261048639 Professor Michael Blome-Tillmann PHIL 200 Oct. 8, 2021 Compatibilism has emerged from a seemingly unsolvable dilemma residing between free will and determinism. Determinism asserts that all actions have a cause, a thesis, that if true, would mean that all human behaviour is determined; that there is no free will. Libertarianism, conversely, declares that humans have free will, rejecting determinism entirely and declaring that humans are not fully subject to the laws of nature. However, for those with no spiritual belief, the complete rejection of science seems absurd; thus another view related to determinism and separate from libertarianism has arisen: compatibilism. This belief, often referred to as soft determinism, posits that determinism is true, yet our actions can still be free, provided they are "caused in the right way” (T. Sider, p.127). Although compatibilism offers a seemingly complete solution to the issue of free will, its shortcomings are quickly apparent. The first of these issues is what being “caused in the right way” means. Sider provides a broad definition, stating, “a free action is one that is caused by the person’s beliefs and desires.” (p.128) Initially, this definition seems to address several of the issues that exist with the compatibilist position. For example, according to Sider, if a person chooses to drink a cup of coffee, it would be a free act. However, if that person is held at gunpoint and told to drink the same cup of coffee against their will, that would be defined as unfree within this framing. Both of these examples align with the general concept of free will. Nonetheless, an argument consistently used against this definition is the case of hypnotism. Supposing a person is hypnotized into believing they want to drink a cup of coffee, the ensuing
action of drinking the coffee would come from their desires and beliefs, yet clearly be unfree. Furthermore, people with certain mental conditions are compelled to behave in certain ways. When a kleptomaniac steals, they are not freely choosing to do so, yet under this definition, they appear to be. Thus, compatibilism offers to resolve this dilemma, arguing that free action comes from your own beliefs and desires, but with a caveat—providing that you were not compelled to have those beliefs and desires. However, this definition brings with it even more difficulties. Sider states, “humans are not an island.” (p.130) He argues that human desires are influenced by the culture and people around them, so how do we differentiate which actions stem from one’s own beliefs and not from those around them? Compatibilism deserves to be critically observed alongside other views on free will. The alternatives of libertarianism, which rejects science, and hard determinism, which rejects all that gives life meaning, do not seem particularly appealing. However, compatibilists need to refine their definition of free will to account for hypnotism and the compulsions associated with certain mental health disorders, as well as addressing environmental influences.
Works Cited Conee, Earl Brink, and Theodore Sider, “Free Will and Determinism.” Essay. In Riddles of Existence: A Guided Tour of Metaphysics. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2014 McKenna, M., & Coates, D. J. (2019, November 26). Compatibilism . Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/compatibilism.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help