Free-Will Vs Determinism

999 Words 4 Pages
When discussing the humane contrast between Free Will and Determinism, Free Will is the side I support. My argument is the concept that all natural occurrences can’t always be explained, but they “just happen”. Even though scientific facts contradict Free Will, a balance of the two beliefs is very possible and is controversial in modern conversation. All human beings contain Free Will in any scenario or situation they encounter; Although this is different for each individual and their beliefs. First we must define the term Free Will; Free Will is the doctrine that the conduct of human beings expresses personal choice and is not simply determined by physical or divine forces ("The Definition Of Free Will"). Which means that every occurrence …show more content…
For example, the authors state that empirical findings have confirmed that gratitude is influenced by perceived motivational sincerity (MacKenzie, Vohs and Baumeister). The statement describes that Free Will enthusiasts can find gratitude due to their perception of situations, therefore creating their idea of a positive outcome. This further supports my idea that Free Will has become more worried modernly because individuals do not have the proper sense of imagination to obtain positive feelings of gratitude or ease within scenarios. My personal view of Free Will is contributive. I strongly support Free Will because it allows the mind 's capabilities to expand over varieties of topics, and how no exact thought can be wrong because with Free Will there is no precise cause to an issue. I also encourage those who are unsure of what side to accept to pick the Free Will side. My reasoning is first, that Free Will does not determine cause from scientific facts. When investigating too deep into scientific evidence, information can get overly complex which makes you question whether this information is true, without an exact source. Secondly, the basis of Free Will depends on that individual 's perspective of what is considered a “valid fact” or “cause”. This perception is different for all, because the whole concept of Free Will revolves around the idea that occurrences aren’t controlled by …show more content…
This is due to the explanations as to why anything within the world can have a determined cause. According to Edwin Locke, To deny the possibility that man can have knowledge, however, is a self-contradiction (Locke and Boyd). This quote describes that without knowledge and Determinism, we are unable to determine causes for the phenomena that occur throughout human life. He continues a point that without any existent knowledge, no determinists can provide valid statements because no knowledge can support the statement, therefore concluding it as invalid. With the accumulation of knowledge, modernly we are capable of expressing intelligible reasoning to situations that appear as “unknown/undetermined”. Flaws found in the Free Will argument can include approaching an undetermined situation with scientific bias, providing a scientific insight which makes the final conclusion somewhat determined by the scientific perspective of that being. Also, the idea that things naturally occur without cause can create implication because of the uncertainty of facts you provide to validate your conclusion, which makes individual perspective an unreliable source to provide causation. A method to resolve problems in the Free Will argument is as mentioned previously, to consider yourself as a Compatibilist. This is a flexible belief that complies with Determinists and Free Will because it

Related Documents