Vegetarianism Vs Compatibilism

1013 Words 4 Pages
Compatibilism holds that human behavior is both caused and determined and voluntary behavior is nonetheless free to the extent that it is not outwardly expressed; however, Libertarianism, on the other hand, implies that all of our choices are free from any sort of deterministic theories or forces. Compatibilism is suited best for explaining free will as it acknowledges man as a free moral agent while being restrained by the doctrine of total depravity; Libertarianism takes upon itself to rely on concepts that tend to juxtapose one another, such as Open Theism, in order to rationalize free will. Compatibilism, as mentioned previously, is the view that causal determinism is true, but mankind still acts freely, being morally responsible agents …show more content…
Every action completed has no foundation from which it is based from. In other words, there are no outside agents of causation that explain behaviors. Concepts such as determinism and freedom aren’t compatible because they both juxtapose one another. One cannot truly act freely if the choices presented to them force them to choose one behavior out of the seemingly endless amount of possible behaviors they could’ve chosen. This “grants the illusion of free will instead of free will itself, creating a dissonance between true free will and elements of determinism” (Perry 395). Libertarianism holds that determinism is false and actions that are explained by pre-determined forces do not exist. Open Theism, a component to the Libertarian rationalization of free will, asserts that God choses to be ignorant of the choices we make throughout our lives. The theory relies on the fact that God, being omnipotent, has knowledge of every outcome that has the potential to be a reality. However, doesn’t know the outcome that will become the reality. Thus, free will is preserved, and the idea of an all-knowing God, can coexist with one another. The idea that free will and an all-knowing God can coexist in the same universe highlights one of the most predominant virtues that come along with the Libertarian perspective on free will. However, the biggest drawback to Libertarianism, for myself, would have to be the relying on God …show more content…
When interpreting free will from a compatibilist perspective, everything can be explained through causal relationships. Why do people behave according to their own interests? Because free will is determined by which actions produce the most benefits for the self. Which actions can we choose from? Only those pre-determined by mankind’s innate sinful nature. Everything has an explanation, which is better than the uncertainty that comes along with Libertarianism. How can actions be explained if no force or agent is to blame for their execution? It’s simply harder to imagine actions that have no reason for their execution and a God that doesn’t know which outcomes have become realities. All these ideas seem be based on loose speculation that don’t have much merit in terms of the bigger picture. Proponents of the Libertarian view on free will would argue that free will is independent of agents of causation therefore, actions are based only on whether the individual desires to complete the action. At its core, Libertarianism rejects determinism and focuses on ideas that concern themselves with liberal independence. I would respond by stating that, actions need foundations from which they are based on. Human nature checks free will by allowing for a reason for actions being chosen and executed.

Related Documents