Voice 1: ...and therein our problem lies, free will exists. It is your fault that you chose to talk to me about this.
Voice 2: No, no, no. All of our actions were determined beforehand because of the natural order of things. This conversation exists because of previous causes, and the causes had causes, and so on. Free will does not exit.
Voice 1: I cannot bring myself to believe in such a thing. Obviously, there are multiple choices to make at any given moment and all the decision making happens in our “brain” we ultimately decide what we do.
Voice 2: Don’t make me lau-
Voice 3: Why not both?
Voice 1 and Voice 2: What?
Voice 3: I asked, “why not both?” because isn’t it entirely possible that both exist?
Voice 1: Right. And who might you be?
Voice 3: The disembodied voice of A. J. Ayer, obviously. I’m here to tell you why you both are seeing things too black and white. …show more content…
It has to be one or the other, and that one is that free will determines how we act.
Voice 3: I don’t wholly disagree with you; however, it depends on your definition of free will. What is it to be free to make a decision? Is it anytime a choice is involved or just a time in which a person is free from external control?
Voice 2: A person can never be free from externalities, they are shaped by it. Therefore, the person can never really choose freely as we are slaves to the universe and its laws. All choices are never really choices as, in the end, one action is taken. This “choice” was determined because of all the causes and universal laws that were all ready set in place.
Voice 1: No, that is simply not true. Any thing that a rational being decides is a choice in itself and these choices are determined by that rational self. Even if a person is under pressure by external causes the being still has a choice to follow it or not. Even a man in prison can still decide to break free, no matter how
Voice 2: No, no, no. All of our actions were determined beforehand because of the natural order of things. This conversation exists because of previous causes, and the causes had causes, and so on. Free will does not exit.
Voice 1: I cannot bring myself to believe in such a thing. Obviously, there are multiple choices to make at any given moment and all the decision making happens in our “brain” we ultimately decide what we do.
Voice 2: Don’t make me lau-
Voice 3: Why not both?
Voice 1 and Voice 2: What?
Voice 3: I asked, “why not both?” because isn’t it entirely possible that both exist?
Voice 1: Right. And who might you be?
Voice 3: The disembodied voice of A. J. Ayer, obviously. I’m here to tell you why you both are seeing things too black and white. …show more content…
It has to be one or the other, and that one is that free will determines how we act.
Voice 3: I don’t wholly disagree with you; however, it depends on your definition of free will. What is it to be free to make a decision? Is it anytime a choice is involved or just a time in which a person is free from external control?
Voice 2: A person can never be free from externalities, they are shaped by it. Therefore, the person can never really choose freely as we are slaves to the universe and its laws. All choices are never really choices as, in the end, one action is taken. This “choice” was determined because of all the causes and universal laws that were all ready set in place.
Voice 1: No, that is simply not true. Any thing that a rational being decides is a choice in itself and these choices are determined by that rational self. Even if a person is under pressure by external causes the being still has a choice to follow it or not. Even a man in prison can still decide to break free, no matter how