From Tralfamadorian philosophy, Billy Pilgrim reaches the conclusion that free will does not exist. This deterministic attitude comes from Billy’s naiveté on the compatibility between our freedom to choose and pre-determined outcomes. For this paper, determinism will be simply defined as stating that given the past and the laws of nature there is only one possible future. In other words, the only future reality that will happen is the only reality that can happen, therefore, the state of the world now and the laws of nature determine the state of the world in the future. A different reality in the future is impossible. Free will seems to stem completely differently. Free will gives us the understanding that we not only have control over our
…show more content…
These compatibilists hold that there is freedom in an action even though doing another action is impossible because the freedom comes from the ability to choose. In other words, I can be in control of my action even though it is impossible for me to do otherwise because there is a difference between ability and possibility. While there is no possibility of me choosing a different action than the one I will choose, I have the ability to choose any action I want to choose, therefore I am free. Compatibilists and determinists differ on the distinction between the possibility that you do something and the ability that you do it. Also, compatibilists bring in reason to our actions. They assert that I am in control of my actions if and only if I do an action because I want to do it. The fact that I want to do something because I am acting on a reason to do it means that I am free in doing what I choose and want to do. This differs from Billy’s conclusion that we perform an action because we are pre-determined to perform it. Rather, compatibilists say that we are doing our actions because we want to do them and we do not do anything else because not only do we not want to do anything else, but we also do not reason to do anything else. We only want to do what we actually do because we reason to do it. Therefore, we are free because we are able to do otherwise if and only if we tried to
These compatibilists hold that there is freedom in an action even though doing another action is impossible because the freedom comes from the ability to choose. In other words, I can be in control of my action even though it is impossible for me to do otherwise because there is a difference between ability and possibility. While there is no possibility of me choosing a different action than the one I will choose, I have the ability to choose any action I want to choose, therefore I am free. Compatibilists and determinists differ on the distinction between the possibility that you do something and the ability that you do it. Also, compatibilists bring in reason to our actions. They assert that I am in control of my actions if and only if I do an action because I want to do it. The fact that I want to do something because I am acting on a reason to do it means that I am free in doing what I choose and want to do. This differs from Billy’s conclusion that we perform an action because we are pre-determined to perform it. Rather, compatibilists say that we are doing our actions because we want to do them and we do not do anything else because not only do we not want to do anything else, but we also do not reason to do anything else. We only want to do what we actually do because we reason to do it. Therefore, we are free because we are able to do otherwise if and only if we tried to