Response Paper
“The Debate Over Free Will”
In chapter nine of the book Problems from Philosophy by James and Stuart Rachels, the authors discuss the debate over free will. The idea of humans having free will is the main argument in this chapter. The authors noted that the more we learn about the human behavior, the less likely it seems that we are free. Though different groups have the same meaning for free will, the goal of this chapter is to determine if we have free will or not. The realization that a force controls decision on what to do and how to do it at any point in time seems so unreal and unexplainable. And the question will be, can anyone prove that our actions are not totally ours?
In this chapter, the authors present the Determinist’s …show more content…
The authors wrote that “it is sometimes suggested that the denial of free will would lead to a fatalistic attitude about the future. There would be no point in striving to change things because the future must follow a set path. But this does not follow” (Rachels 119). I totally agree with them on this. Regardless of if we have free will or not, we need to act for things to be done. If I will make the world a better place, standing up and starting in a place will be the best thing to do, since sitting by will get nothing done. The authors state that “a belief in free will seem necessary to retain our commonsense picture of moral agency” (124). Everyone should be accountable for their own actions. I don’t think there is anything prompting people to act in some ways, you choose what you want to do, think it through then carry it out. So, you either get a reward or penalty for it. According to the Rachels, “what exactly produces our decision” (115)? This I find interesting and thought-provoking. If we cannot prove a force either in or outside us controlling or deciding what we do, then we must agree that we have free will. Another of their question that got me thinking is “can we continue to regard people as good or bad if they lack free will” (120)? Though I couldn’t give a specific answer to this, it opens my mind to something else. It seems normal to quickly think of the implication of doing bad things, who get punished,
“The Debate Over Free Will”
In chapter nine of the book Problems from Philosophy by James and Stuart Rachels, the authors discuss the debate over free will. The idea of humans having free will is the main argument in this chapter. The authors noted that the more we learn about the human behavior, the less likely it seems that we are free. Though different groups have the same meaning for free will, the goal of this chapter is to determine if we have free will or not. The realization that a force controls decision on what to do and how to do it at any point in time seems so unreal and unexplainable. And the question will be, can anyone prove that our actions are not totally ours?
In this chapter, the authors present the Determinist’s …show more content…
The authors wrote that “it is sometimes suggested that the denial of free will would lead to a fatalistic attitude about the future. There would be no point in striving to change things because the future must follow a set path. But this does not follow” (Rachels 119). I totally agree with them on this. Regardless of if we have free will or not, we need to act for things to be done. If I will make the world a better place, standing up and starting in a place will be the best thing to do, since sitting by will get nothing done. The authors state that “a belief in free will seem necessary to retain our commonsense picture of moral agency” (124). Everyone should be accountable for their own actions. I don’t think there is anything prompting people to act in some ways, you choose what you want to do, think it through then carry it out. So, you either get a reward or penalty for it. According to the Rachels, “what exactly produces our decision” (115)? This I find interesting and thought-provoking. If we cannot prove a force either in or outside us controlling or deciding what we do, then we must agree that we have free will. Another of their question that got me thinking is “can we continue to regard people as good or bad if they lack free will” (120)? Though I couldn’t give a specific answer to this, it opens my mind to something else. It seems normal to quickly think of the implication of doing bad things, who get punished,