For those of us grew up in the United States, we are brought up in a society that teaches us that we possess free will, and from that free will, we are morally responsible as individuals for our actions. However, when it comes to the topic of free will in a philosophical sense, there appears to be more than what we are taught as children.
While many believe in the idea of our free will, there are others who believe that individuals are not responsible for their actions. This comes from an idea that there are forces beyond our control, and that our actions are simply causal – meaning that there are events in within our realm of existence that explain our behaviors. If we consider basic human behavior as a response to outside influences, this …show more content…
One of the positions on this issue is libertarianism, or the theory that humans are entirely free and are the sole cause for all of their actions. Alternatively, hard determinists believe that one’s thoughts and actions are pre-determined by previous events, and even claim that everything before that moment is determined by further events that happened prior to that moment. The theory of compatibilism meets those aforementioned theories in the middle. Proponents of compatibilism believe that although everything is already determined for us, we can still act voluntarily with our own thoughts and desires – however, those thoughts and desires have no effect on our pre-determined …show more content…
We are taught to have responsibility and self-control, which form the basis of our moral and legal obligations from youth into adulthood. For example, if an individual is charged with a violent crime, they might claim that they were not responsible for their actions as a result of their upbringing. They can claim any number of things, from a range of serious childhood abuse to something as accidental as being dropped on their head by a parent. Many violent offenders claim psychological disturbance, or mental illness when defending themselves against taking responsibility for their crimes. In other words, their behavior was pre-determined by their upbringing, and therefore they cannot be responsible for their
While many believe in the idea of our free will, there are others who believe that individuals are not responsible for their actions. This comes from an idea that there are forces beyond our control, and that our actions are simply causal – meaning that there are events in within our realm of existence that explain our behaviors. If we consider basic human behavior as a response to outside influences, this …show more content…
One of the positions on this issue is libertarianism, or the theory that humans are entirely free and are the sole cause for all of their actions. Alternatively, hard determinists believe that one’s thoughts and actions are pre-determined by previous events, and even claim that everything before that moment is determined by further events that happened prior to that moment. The theory of compatibilism meets those aforementioned theories in the middle. Proponents of compatibilism believe that although everything is already determined for us, we can still act voluntarily with our own thoughts and desires – however, those thoughts and desires have no effect on our pre-determined …show more content…
We are taught to have responsibility and self-control, which form the basis of our moral and legal obligations from youth into adulthood. For example, if an individual is charged with a violent crime, they might claim that they were not responsible for their actions as a result of their upbringing. They can claim any number of things, from a range of serious childhood abuse to something as accidental as being dropped on their head by a parent. Many violent offenders claim psychological disturbance, or mental illness when defending themselves against taking responsibility for their crimes. In other words, their behavior was pre-determined by their upbringing, and therefore they cannot be responsible for their