The Free Will Debate

Over the course of time people have come to acknowledge and accept that we as humans have the ability to have free will. This goes along with the debate between libertarianism and hard determinism.The argument for  libertarianism is the belief that we as human beings have the ability to control and change our actions relying on our own free will; however, it is not claiming that all actions are free will. On the other hand determinism denies libertarian beliefs sayings that human beings in fact lack free will because of the fact that all of our actions are caused by earlier psychological or physical events.

The premise of the determinism argument makes libertarianism the more plausible side to pick in the debate since libertarianism believes that humans have the ability to think and act for themselves with the acknowledgement that not everything falls under the free will category. It makes more sense in that free will does not eliminate the moral responsibilities people have which is a radical implication.  If people have no free will, then they cannot be blamed for any of their actions and that is something that would cause issues if say for example someone went on a massive killing spree and when put on trial claimed that he was doing these murders against his free will. That would make it a hard call on the jury wouldn't it? That is why claiming that human beings have a moral responsibility to be able to have spontaneous free will or the ability to control their actions and alter the course of their own lives.

Explanatory breadth- Libertarianism explains more of human behavior as opposed to determinism in that people themselves believe that they have free will and they have the ability to think and do things for themselves. Humans tend to be more independant.  

Explanatory depth- Determinism has more explanatory depth since it has a more concrete explanation as far as the causes of human behavior is greater detailer compared to libertarianism since it is based on humans having spontaneous free will and spontaneous actions are not specific enough to be concrete answers compared to the determinist view that humans actions are predetermined due to prior actions. Say for example someone decided to rob a bank, saying they did it because they felt like it does not make as much sense as the fact that people have attempted to rob a bank in the past, giving them to idea of doing it themselves.

Simplicity- The theory that has fewer parts is determinism since it does not have spontaneity along with it which leaves room for other interpretation. With free will having other aspects to it; it becomes unclear and more susceptible to errors along the way.

Conservatism- The theory of libertarianism is more consistent with our common sense. In today’s world more people are straying further away from religious views and leaning more towards scientific explanations. The belief that humans have free will is more widely believed and accepted since it is something people can understand and relate to the fact that they themselves have made their own conscious decisions in life.

1. Libertarianism and Hard Determinism are the most plausible explanations of human action.

2. Libertarianism has much more explanatory breadth and conservatism while Hard determinism has a small advantage in explanatory depth and simplicity.

3. Therefore, Libertarianism is the most likely explanation of human actions since it is a more plausible reason why people act as opposed to something that will leave people without blame.