The idea of moral responsibility is argued between determinists and libertarians, with the division being caused by the possibility of free will. Steven Cahn offers an explanation of the different views of free will with the three opinions being hard determinism, soft determinism, and libertarianism. In this writing, I am going to explain Cahn’s viewpoint, and his idea that freedom is not compatible with determinism.
The setting for this argument begins with a criminal trial from the early twentieth century. Two boys plead guilty to killing another boy and faced a possible death penalty. The defense lawyer put up a case that the boys were not morally responsible for the crime because they were a product of their environment. The lawyer's argument …show more content…
An example used by Cahn for this idea this involves a patient with an arm pain. The doctor then proceeds to say the pain has no mental or physical cause, but the pain is surely still occurring. This is a confusing tale because according to Cahn “if nothing were causing [the pain], you wouldn’t be in pain" (171). According to the hard determinist, every action has a cause. Another argument Cahn lists regarding hard determinism is a comparison of people to rocks. “… just as a rock has no control over the wind that causes it to break off, so people have no control over the desires and beliefs that cause them to act" (172). Hard determinists do not believe people have any effect on the world; they are only puppets in a grand scheme. This couples with the story of the boys on trial. Desires are completely influenced by outside conditions predetermined years before the action, eliminating a notion of free will. A hard determinist would not hold the boys morally accountable since they had no real choice over their …show more content…
Soft determinists still believe in a predetermined world, but contrary to a hard determinist, a soft determinist believes that free will does exist. Soft determinists argue free will on the language that it is used. An example used is of a person walking down the street, where the person is not sleep walking or being pushed, but instead acting on his or her own accord. That person is walking because he or she chooses to, not by force. Cahn states “even if the action is one link in a casual chain… nevertheless I am free with regard to that action, for I wish to perform it, and if I did not wish to, I would not do so" (174). For a soft determinist, the ultimate deciding factor of free will is whether or not the action completed was chosen by the individual. If a person completed an action but did not choose to, a soft determinist would not believe that action is under free
The setting for this argument begins with a criminal trial from the early twentieth century. Two boys plead guilty to killing another boy and faced a possible death penalty. The defense lawyer put up a case that the boys were not morally responsible for the crime because they were a product of their environment. The lawyer's argument …show more content…
An example used by Cahn for this idea this involves a patient with an arm pain. The doctor then proceeds to say the pain has no mental or physical cause, but the pain is surely still occurring. This is a confusing tale because according to Cahn “if nothing were causing [the pain], you wouldn’t be in pain" (171). According to the hard determinist, every action has a cause. Another argument Cahn lists regarding hard determinism is a comparison of people to rocks. “… just as a rock has no control over the wind that causes it to break off, so people have no control over the desires and beliefs that cause them to act" (172). Hard determinists do not believe people have any effect on the world; they are only puppets in a grand scheme. This couples with the story of the boys on trial. Desires are completely influenced by outside conditions predetermined years before the action, eliminating a notion of free will. A hard determinist would not hold the boys morally accountable since they had no real choice over their …show more content…
Soft determinists still believe in a predetermined world, but contrary to a hard determinist, a soft determinist believes that free will does exist. Soft determinists argue free will on the language that it is used. An example used is of a person walking down the street, where the person is not sleep walking or being pushed, but instead acting on his or her own accord. That person is walking because he or she chooses to, not by force. Cahn states “even if the action is one link in a casual chain… nevertheless I am free with regard to that action, for I wish to perform it, and if I did not wish to, I would not do so" (174). For a soft determinist, the ultimate deciding factor of free will is whether or not the action completed was chosen by the individual. If a person completed an action but did not choose to, a soft determinist would not believe that action is under free