Three Positions: Hard Determinism, Libertarianism, and Compatibilism I have been given the following scenario (borrowed from Lawhead’s Dave/Todd scenarios on pg. 115): “Dave was having an affair with Todd’s wife and wanted her husband out of the way. After weeks of planning and stalking Todd, Dave shot and killed him as Todd left his gym”. In this essay, I am going to first explain metaphysical freedom and circumstantial freedom. Next, I will answer the key questions asked, as well as relate them to the case above. In doing so, I will explain the three theories on freedom and responsibility, and show how each position would answer the questions in relation to the case. Circumstantial Freedom is a negate condition, as it means
…show more content…
Libertarianism is the thesis that we do have metaphysical freedom; a rejection of determinism. Libertarians believe that without metaphysical freedom, our character and choices are the inevitable product of forces beyond our control. Free choices are grounded in the free will of the person, and are not the inevitable result of previous causes (Lawhead 120). In response to the question “Can Dave be held morally responsible for killing Todd”? the answer is “yes”. Libertarians believe the self is an agent with free will, which transcends formed character and can act contrary to character or inclination in making moral choices (Philosophy-Dictionaries). Libertarians believe that sometimes we can choose to overrule our desires (Lawhead 141). Hard determinist and Libertarians have one belief in common; that being determined is incompatible with moral responsibility (Lawhead 120). Since Libertarians believe that we do have metaphysical freedom and that we are not determined, the belief of moral responsibility is accepted. Therefore, in the Libertarian view; Dave is morally responsible for killing …show more content…
They claim that free actions are those that are done voluntarily; it does not mean that the action lacks inevitable determining causes operating upon the person. Instead a voluntary action is said to be one in which the determining causes reside WITHIN the person, instead of being external to him or her. External causes are thought of as physical forces or conditions, where internal causes are considered the persons own personality, values, beliefs, desires, motives and other psychological states (Lawhead 153). Finally, in the question “Can Dave be held morally responsible for killing Todd”? The Compatibilist view would say “Yes”, because Dave was free and responsible as his actions were not forced by external conditions, but were controlled by his own psychological state (Lawhead 153). Compatibilist believe that criminals as well as law abiding citizens are morally responsible for their actions, if their actions were the outcome of who they are, and what they believe, value or desire. In this case, Dave desired to kill Todd, therefore Dave is morally
Libertarianism is the thesis that we do have metaphysical freedom; a rejection of determinism. Libertarians believe that without metaphysical freedom, our character and choices are the inevitable product of forces beyond our control. Free choices are grounded in the free will of the person, and are not the inevitable result of previous causes (Lawhead 120). In response to the question “Can Dave be held morally responsible for killing Todd”? the answer is “yes”. Libertarians believe the self is an agent with free will, which transcends formed character and can act contrary to character or inclination in making moral choices (Philosophy-Dictionaries). Libertarians believe that sometimes we can choose to overrule our desires (Lawhead 141). Hard determinist and Libertarians have one belief in common; that being determined is incompatible with moral responsibility (Lawhead 120). Since Libertarians believe that we do have metaphysical freedom and that we are not determined, the belief of moral responsibility is accepted. Therefore, in the Libertarian view; Dave is morally responsible for killing …show more content…
They claim that free actions are those that are done voluntarily; it does not mean that the action lacks inevitable determining causes operating upon the person. Instead a voluntary action is said to be one in which the determining causes reside WITHIN the person, instead of being external to him or her. External causes are thought of as physical forces or conditions, where internal causes are considered the persons own personality, values, beliefs, desires, motives and other psychological states (Lawhead 153). Finally, in the question “Can Dave be held morally responsible for killing Todd”? The Compatibilist view would say “Yes”, because Dave was free and responsible as his actions were not forced by external conditions, but were controlled by his own psychological state (Lawhead 153). Compatibilist believe that criminals as well as law abiding citizens are morally responsible for their actions, if their actions were the outcome of who they are, and what they believe, value or desire. In this case, Dave desired to kill Todd, therefore Dave is morally