free will debate

Free Will Debate

The free will debate consists of two very unlike debates. These debates are libertarianism and hard determinism. The libertarianism debate is about human beings having spontaneous free will where they have the authority to control their actions as well as modify the course of their lives. The hard determinism debate is where human beings do not have the ability of free will. This is when it’s believed that all actions are initiated by previous physical and psychological events.

Libertarianism is more plausible than hard determinism. This due to the fact that the average individual thinks and makes decisions before they decide their actions. Every decision an individual makes has an effect on their future and just maybe on our own future as well. Many actions individuals tend to make happen to be unknown, meaning we don’t know the reason for it but for that individual taking that action was something they needed to do. Other individuals supporting their actions or previous events that may have occurred in their lives may have an effect on their decisions but it’s still one’s own choice of their actions. These decisions are what decide what the future beholds.

Explanatory breadth- Libertarianism as well as hard determinism clarifies the many different types of human behavior. Both debates happen to have these different behaviors but yet they fail to address them. Both debates support as well as back up the W.T Stace belief that actions and behaviors have different causes. But hard determinism has a bit more to do with this belief because hard determinism does not really give much of a choice in different cases. One of many of W.T Stace’s examples is “stealing bread because one is hungry verses stealing because one’s employer threatened to beat one.” In this example they are both choices for existence. But the first choice of the example was the individuals free will, while the second was linked more to hard determinism due to the event that had occurred which was being threatened, and there was way to avoid the event.

Explanatory depth- Libertarianism explains in greater depth as to why we have the choice to make decisions as oppose to hard determinism. Hard determinism is the belief that human beings are not morally responsible for their actions but it does not explain why we think before we make our decisions and take our actions. Humans have the ability to change a decision and contemplate upon it. They can make a decision and when it is time to finalize that decision they can go the complete opposite way of that decision. This is all because human beings have the authority to make choices.

Simplicity- Libertarianism has fewer parts to it as well as making fewer assumptions as oppose to hard determinism. It explains as to why we have the authority to make decisions and choices also what makes a person different from other individuals. If an individual were to lack the ability of free will then they would go by whatever is making them make those actions or take those decisions.

Conservatism- Libertarianism happens to be more dependable with people’s current beliefs. There are not many individuals who would side with hard determinism due to the fact that it would not be considered normal. To many individuals believing that previous physical as well as psychological events are responsible as well as impact our decisions and actions can be a bit senseless to them. But then again there are beliefs that god is the reason as the choices they make.

1

11.  Libertarianism and hard determinism are the supreme plausible explanations of free will.

22.   Libertarianism has a bit more explanatory depth, simplicity, as well as conservatism where as hard determinism has a bit more explanatory breadth. But libertarianism and hard determinism both due have explanatory breadth.

33.  Therefore libertarianism is the most qualified explanation of free will.