1.
Say whether you think compatibilism or incompatibilism is more plausible, and why. If you think
compatibilism is more plausible, explain how you think the compatibilist should reply to the
Consequence Argument. If you think incompatibilism is more plausible, say how you think an
incompatibilist should reply to Hume's argument for compatibilism (we did not discuss Hume's
argument in class, but it is contained in the Hume reading,"Liberty and Necessity").
Determinism and free will are not compatible to each other. The incompatibilist definition
of freedom is more inclusive and ultimate than that of compatibilist. The difference between
incompatibilist who believes that determinism and free will cannot co-exist and compatibilist who
believe that a person still can behave on their own will in deterministic world starts from their
different definitions of freedom. We will see the example which shows the different definition of
freedom each incompatibilist and compatibilist is adopting. Based on the idea of being free, I will
examine how incompatibilist has more plausibility than compatibilist. Then we will go through
possible argument from incompatibilist against Humean theory.
In incompatibilist view, free will is the power to do something different in exactly the same circumstances.
Otherwise, compatibilist defines freedom as the power to do as we choose, to act as we will
("power of acting or not acting"). The compatibilist view is shown well in section VIII of Hume's Enquiry.
"By liberty, then, we can only mean a power of acting or not acting, according to the determinations of the will;
that is, if we choose to remain at rest, we may; if we choose to move, we also may. Now this hypothetical
liberty is universally allowed to belong to everyone who is not a prisoners and in chains."
Let's say that I have Stanford game, which is quite huge, in one hour and just a minute ago,
my boyfriend, who is not interested in football called me and asked me to hang out. In that
situation, 2 choices are available for me. Giving up the Stanford game and have a lovely date with
bf and leaving my boyfriend behind and go to game which I have expected so much. Both have
equal chances to be chosen since each of them has its own advantage and disadvantage. In
incompatibilist's view, the fact that I am free in this situation equals that there are choices open for
me and I have an ability to choose between them. In the compatibilist's view, on the other hand,
the meaning for freedom applied differently. From the compatibilist's view, I have to be able to
make it if and only if I choose to go to the game. If my boyfriend gets furious at me choosing game
over him and prevent me from going to the game, I would not be free anymore. If I win over the
argument with my boyfriend and step into the stadium, then I would regain the freedom.
For thistwo different applications of freedom, I believe that the Incompatibilist freedom is more ultimate
and inclusive. With the compatibilist freedom, I can act freely as I will. However, it doens't mean
that I could have willed otherwise. The the fighting Irish spirit of Notre Dame might have captured
me and controlled me to desire to go to the game. In that case, if I succeed in going to Stanford
game, I performed a "Power of acting or not acting", but not on my own will.
Throughout the "Of Liberty and Necessity", Hume demonstrates the uniformity and
following in human nature by talking about how human lives are all based on common and
universal principles. After the description of constant connexion, he also says that there are some
varieties and irregularities between individuals even though their deep down nature are composed
of same principle. By saying how individuals of differentiated compositions can come out from
deterministic natural disciplines, he concludes that actions are from "motives, tempers and
circumstances" while the deterministically basic rule that motives arises the voluntary action is
grounded under the theorem of freedom of actions. By agreeing with the compability between
determinism and free will, he generally displays the soft determinism.
The Classical compatibilism is often associated with the thesis that the word freedom in the
expression freedom of will modifies a condition of action and not will. Against Humean theory, the
incompatibilist might argue that motives, which can be replaced by desire or will, can be
pre-determined and make question whether a person is really acting freely if he is acting according
to pre-determined will. The psychological disorders such as hydrophobia can be the example for
this. A person born with hydrophobia is determined to avoid of water. If he decided to not to get
into the water and stay out of water, he is acting as he wants. However, he cannot want otherwise
since he is biologically determined to avoid water. So, even though he wants to want otherwise, he
cannot do so. Also, same argument can be applied to the case of the brainwash. Additionally,
incompatibilist might argue that determinism is that those irregularities and differences between
individuals are all pre-determinded to be that irregular and different. Incompatibilist with monistic
view might argue that person is a material substance which is dominated by physical and biological
rules. Toward the variants throughout individuals, which are represented as freedom in
deterministic world in Hume's argument, the monistic incompatibilist would say that those variants
are all determined by natural rules.
Say whether you think compatibilism or incompatibilism is more plausible, and why. If you think
compatibilism is more plausible, explain how you think the compatibilist should reply to the
Consequence Argument. If you think incompatibilism is more plausible, say how you think an
incompatibilist should reply to Hume's argument for compatibilism (we did not discuss Hume's
argument in class, but it is contained in the Hume reading,"Liberty and Necessity").
Determinism and free will are not compatible to each other. The incompatibilist definition
of freedom is more inclusive and ultimate than that of compatibilist. The difference between
incompatibilist who believes that determinism and free will cannot co-exist and compatibilist who
believe that a person still can behave on their own will in deterministic world starts from their
different definitions of freedom. We will see the example which shows the different definition of
freedom each incompatibilist and compatibilist is adopting. Based on the idea of being free, I will
examine how incompatibilist has more plausibility than compatibilist. Then we will go through
possible argument from incompatibilist against Humean theory.
In incompatibilist view, free will is the power to do something different in exactly the same circumstances.
Otherwise, compatibilist defines freedom as the power to do as we choose, to act as we will
("power of acting or not acting"). The compatibilist view is shown well in section VIII of Hume's Enquiry.
"By liberty, then, we can only mean a power of acting or not acting, according to the determinations of the will;
that is, if we choose to remain at rest, we may; if we choose to move, we also may. Now this hypothetical
liberty is universally allowed to belong to everyone who is not a prisoners and in chains."
Let's say that I have Stanford game, which is quite huge, in one hour and just a minute ago,
my boyfriend, who is not interested in football called me and asked me to hang out. In that
situation, 2 choices are available for me. Giving up the Stanford game and have a lovely date with
bf and leaving my boyfriend behind and go to game which I have expected so much. Both have
equal chances to be chosen since each of them has its own advantage and disadvantage. In
incompatibilist's view, the fact that I am free in this situation equals that there are choices open for
me and I have an ability to choose between them. In the compatibilist's view, on the other hand,
the meaning for freedom applied differently. From the compatibilist's view, I have to be able to
make it if and only if I choose to go to the game. If my boyfriend gets furious at me choosing game
over him and prevent me from going to the game, I would not be free anymore. If I win over the
argument with my boyfriend and step into the stadium, then I would regain the freedom.
For thistwo different applications of freedom, I believe that the Incompatibilist freedom is more ultimate
and inclusive. With the compatibilist freedom, I can act freely as I will. However, it doens't mean
that I could have willed otherwise. The the fighting Irish spirit of Notre Dame might have captured
me and controlled me to desire to go to the game. In that case, if I succeed in going to Stanford
game, I performed a "Power of acting or not acting", but not on my own will.
Throughout the "Of Liberty and Necessity", Hume demonstrates the uniformity and
following in human nature by talking about how human lives are all based on common and
universal principles. After the description of constant connexion, he also says that there are some
varieties and irregularities between individuals even though their deep down nature are composed
of same principle. By saying how individuals of differentiated compositions can come out from
deterministic natural disciplines, he concludes that actions are from "motives, tempers and
circumstances" while the deterministically basic rule that motives arises the voluntary action is
grounded under the theorem of freedom of actions. By agreeing with the compability between
determinism and free will, he generally displays the soft determinism.
The Classical compatibilism is often associated with the thesis that the word freedom in the
expression freedom of will modifies a condition of action and not will. Against Humean theory, the
incompatibilist might argue that motives, which can be replaced by desire or will, can be
pre-determined and make question whether a person is really acting freely if he is acting according
to pre-determined will. The psychological disorders such as hydrophobia can be the example for
this. A person born with hydrophobia is determined to avoid of water. If he decided to not to get
into the water and stay out of water, he is acting as he wants. However, he cannot want otherwise
since he is biologically determined to avoid water. So, even though he wants to want otherwise, he
cannot do so. Also, same argument can be applied to the case of the brainwash. Additionally,
incompatibilist might argue that determinism is that those irregularities and differences between
individuals are all pre-determinded to be that irregular and different. Incompatibilist with monistic
view might argue that person is a material substance which is dominated by physical and biological
rules. Toward the variants throughout individuals, which are represented as freedom in
deterministic world in Hume's argument, the monistic incompatibilist would say that those variants
are all determined by natural rules.