Chapter 8 Freedom and Determinism Freedom Determinism External

Chapter 8 • Freedom and Determinism

Freedom & Determinism • External freedom – removed by paralysis or force • Internal freedom – removed in some mental conditions (e. g. , profound mental retardation; schizophrenia with strange beliefs, hallucinations, extreme paranoia) • Political freedom – Removed in some countries limiting freedom to vote, practice certain religions, speak freely, etc.

Freedom of Alternate Possibilities • Have you ever felt regret? Guilt? • We all believe that people should be held morally responsible when they have alternate possibilities freedom (the idea that you really do choose an action from multiple possible actions) • Is there alternate possibilities freedom when: – A 2 year old takes candy from a store? – An elderly man with dementia bites his nurse? – A man smuggles drugs into a country to prevent execution of wife and children?

Hard theories to accept • Hard determinism: there is no such thing as free choice; we cannot be held morally responsible for our own actions • Hard indeterminism: we always have free choice; nothing pushes our behavior except our own free will

Watch out for fatalism • Sometimes determinism is confused with fatalism (what will happen, no matter what I do). • This silly belief does not follow laws of nature.

Counterarguments • Against hard determinism – I’m not free to do right or wrong, I can’t be judged – There no “right” or “wrong” behaviors • Against hard indeterminism – What controls which chance outcome occurs? – How do you explain the interaction of chance with the physical world? How does an immaterial mover move a material substance (e. g. , the mindbody problem)?

Compatibilism: Easier to swallow? • Frankfurt’s counterexample – Ben, the evil scientist, hates Sam – Jim hates Sam; contemplating murder – Sam will die in this story

Compatibilism • Moral responsibility does not require freedom of response, only attitude response • Imagine driving and accidentally hitting a cat. A. If you felt horrible, then you’re innocent. Causes beyond your control forced you to kill, but your emotional response (guilt) indicates you morally objected to those forces. B. If you felt nothing, then you’re morally flawed. Causes beyond your control forced your action but you did not object to doing evil.

What’s the point of compatibilism? • If you’re going to kill a cat either way, why does it matter if you’re morally responsible? • It seems compatibilism holds onto moral responsibility to spare humans some level of behavioral agency and accountability • Where do you stand? Why? ØDeterminism ØCompatibilism ØIndeterminism