David Hume Free Will Analysis

Many of our standard societal interactions rely on the assumption that people are responsible for their actions. When someone does something good, he or she can be rewarded in some way for this act, such as getting a promotion or a medal of honor. Conversely, when one commits a wrongdoing, he or she can be punished, like when a criminal is put in jail. These interactions work because the person in question is assumed to be responsible for their actions; in other words, he or she freely chose to proceed. However, this concept faces a challenge when placed into context with determinism, the idea that everything happens because something causes it to happen. If someone’s actions are causally determined, could we say he or she had the free will to choose them? As a proponent of soft determinism, Hume would answer yes. For Hume, the seeming incompatibility of determinism and free will is merely a …show more content…
I, as do many people, have a natural inclination to believe in the concept of free will, as I want to believe I have control over my own actions. However, I also cringe at the idea of my choices being in a sense random, devoid of my own will which is in itself somewhat of a cause. Thus, Hume’s argument presents an appealing middle ground. Furthermore, I certainly agree that although it may be hard to glean the cause of an event, it does not mean such a cause does not exist. One could possibly question Hume’s definition of liberty, bringing up the example of addiction as a cause, which, although purely internal, complicates the notion of free will in one’s actions. Although a drug addict is acting according to his or her own wants and inclinations, is he or she not constrained by these desires? However, despite these grey areas involved with his definition of liberty, I think Hume presents a strong argument in favor of the compatibility of liberty with