Free Will and Determinism

Critically assess the idea that all our decisions are predetermined.

Hard determinists such as Clarence Darrow and Ted Honderich believe that human actions, decisions and choices are wholly determined by external factors and that humans do not have genuine free will and therefore are not ethically accountable for their decisions. Ivan Pavlov also holds a psychologist view of hard determinism. However, soft determinists such as John Locke and Hume claim that although we are controlled by external factors to an extent, humans still possess free will. Whereas, the libertarian view according to Thomas Reid is that humans are free in reality to make moral choices and thus are responsible for their actions. Therefore, the main issue for discussion is to whether or not human decisions are predetermined or whether we have free will to make our own decisions and thus are responsible for the choices we make.

Clarence Darrow was an American Lawyer who upheld a psychological hard deterministic view and believed that our actions are determined by our upbringing and social conditioning. Darrow became famous after he defended the murder case of two young boys, Loeb and Leopold who had kidnapped and murdered a 14 year old boy named Bobbie Franks. Darrow argued that it is not Loeb's and Leopold's fault because they were predetermined by their upbringing to commit such a murder, instead he blamed their parents, wealthy upbringing and lifestyle and education. Due to the fact that Darrow believed that the boys did not kill the boy out of spite but instead 'they killed him as they might kill a spider or fly, for the experience because they were made that way', Darrow did not blame them. As a result, the sentence given to the youths was reduced from a death penalty to life-imprisonment. Therefore, Darrow would argue that our decisions are pre-determined and that we are not responsible for them. However, this can be challenged by arguing that if a court dismisses a murder as hereditary, what purpose is the court fulfilling, because this seems as though there is no justification for the punishment of any crime. Furthermore, Erasmus, a liberal-minded Catholic argued in 'On the freedom of the will' that God made humans with free will and that despite the fall of Adam and Eve, we still have freedom. Therefore, Erasmus may disagree with Darrow in that our actions are not pre-determined, but that we do have free will to make decisions. Therefore Erasmum would argue that our decisions are not pre-determined.

Ted Honderich, a British Philosopher supported the theory of Hard Determinism. Honderich believed that nothing happens without a reason, as Aristotle concluded and human beings have no control over why something happened as it did. All events are determined, internally and externally and anything that a human does is as a result of what has already happened. Therefore, humans are not responsible for their actions because they are just a part of a chain of events which have already been set into motion. For Honderich, all our actions are caused by states of the brain and 'all our choices, decisions, intuitions, other mental events and our actions are nothing more than effects of other equally necessitated events'. Thus, Honderich would argue that our decisions are predetermined. However, David Hume who was a Philosopher that was influenced by the works of Sir Isaac Newton, would argue that although events are predetermined because of a causal link between two objects, he believed that this causal link which was predetermined produces free will. For example, if an individual is stuck in Rome they have the free will whether to take a train to Paris through the Channel Tunel or enjoy another week in Rome. Hume then states that this is free choice, the liberty of spontaneity. The liberty of spontaneity is that when one looks at such a situation they will spontaneously decide whether to stay put or get home another way but it doesn’t mean that the decision is thought through because a spontaneous decision is one that cannot be predetermined and therefore one has the choice whether to try to get home or not. Therefore, Hume would argue that although predetermined events cannot be controlled, they create free choice and thus, to some extent humans are responsible for the way they choose to act. 

Ivan Pavlov, was a Physiologist who upheld a hard determinist view. Pavlov argued that people can be 'trained' to act in certain ways under certain circumstances and attempted to show this through an experiment with dogs. When he rang a bell to bell to feed his dogs he noticed that the sound of the bell alone would make the dogs salivate because they associated the bell with food. Pavlov later got rid of the food and found that the sound of the bell alone, even without the food, would make the dogs salivate. Thus, although Pavlov did not argue that human actions are predetermined he suggested that we could perhaps do something similar to manipulate human behaviour. However, a weakness of Pavlov's argument is that human behaviour is far more complex than the behaviour of dogs as we do not respond to the sound of a bell, because it is not in our nature. Thomas Reid, a Scottish Philosopher, would argue that human actions are not predetermined, because although humans are limited by nature, it does not affect free will because free will is subject based, which means that one is free to make choices and follow them through. For example, an individual wishes to support a charity but is limited to because they do not have any money to donate. The individual, still wanting to help this good cause walks to the nearest charity shop and asks how they can help to support the charity. This is what Reid called a 'common-sense' understanding of free will. Therefore, Reid argues that our actions are not determined but that it is our ability to control our life and free will allows us to develop and gain moral responsibility, during the process. John Locke, an English Philosopher argued using his analogy of the locked room that free will is an illusion. The analogy shows a man in a darkened locked room, who awakens from his sleep and decides to remain in the room, but he is unaware and ignorant to the fact that the room is locked. Due to his ignorance of the actual situation he is led to believe that he has the freedom to leave the room if he chooses to. Thus, Locke would argue that due to this it was predetermined that the man would have to remain in the room and to an extent he would state that our actions are predetermined. Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India would argue that 'Life is like a game of cards. The hand that is dealt you represents determinism, the way you play it is free will'. Therefore, Nehru would state that although some of our decisions are predetermined, not all of them are because of the existence of free will. Benedict Spinoza argues that 'in the mind there is no absolute or free will, but the mind is determined to wish this'. Spinoza believed in cause and affect and argued that freedom is gained from reason of knowledge through our emotions, however we never have complete control. Thus, we cannot be held morally responsible for our actions if they are causally determined and not a result of our own moral choice.