biography

Earl Conee and Theodore Sider, Riddles of Existence

Ch. 6: Free Will & Determinism

This chapter concerns something very dear to most people: the idea that we are metaphysically free. It is, however, far from obvious (1) what freedom of the will means and (2) whether we are free at all. Here is a brief outline of Sider’s chapter on this issue.

Framing the Problem

• Free Will: To act in such a way that one could have done otherwise (114)

• Determinism: Every event has a cause (115)

• Determinism and free will seem incompatible

• Likewise, determinism and moral judgments seem incompatible because moral judgments require free will

Incompatibilism

• Hard Determinism

  • Hard Determinism accepts that every event has a cause and rejects that we have free will

  • Nevertheless, it may still be possible to make sense of moral judgments

  • There is a serious question about whether hard determinism is believable

• Libertarianism: Reject determinism

  • Libertarianism accepts that we have free will and either rejects determinism or attempts to complicate it

  • The key idea is that humans are special in some way

  • Claim 1: Science will never succeed in completely predicting human behavior (121)

  • Claim 2: Persons have souls unbound by physical laws

  • Claim 3: Persons are physical systems but unbound by the laws that apply to other physical systems

  • Problem 1: Freedom cannot be uncaused action

  • Problem 2: Agent causation as detached from beliefs and desires

Extra Discussion: God’s omniscience and free will (not in the book):

Sometimes, those who adopt a libertarian position do so for religious reasons. Insofar as this goes, it is perfectly fine. However, the problem of free will has historically resurfaced within the theological domain. I would like to pinpoint one way to reveal that problem here before proceeding with the rest of Sider’s article.

Suppose God exists, and for the sake of argument, suppose God has certain attributes: omnipotence, omniscience, and moral perfection. It is claimed by some religions that God also gives humans free will. The argument here is that God’s omniscience and human free will are incompatible.

1. God is omniscient.

2. If God is omniscient, then God knows all facts.

3. If God knows all facts, then God knows what I will do in 10 minutes.

4. If God knows what I will do in 10 minutes, I cannot do otherwise.

5. If I cannot do otherwise, then I do not have free will.

Therefore, I do not have free will.

If the above argument is a good one, this requires one of three things:

1. Denying free will

2. Denying God’s omniscience (while retaining God’s existence)

3. Denying God’s existence

Back to Sider…

Compatibilism

• Accept both determinism and free will

• Must re-conceptualize freedom of the will

• A free action is one that is caused in the right way (129)

• May need to understand the action in light of the “rules of the game”

• But what is in the right way?

  • Attempt 1: A free action is one that is caused by a person’s beliefs and desires (130)

  • Attempt 2: … provided that the person has freely chosen those beliefs and desires (131)

  • Attempt 3: … provided that the person was not compelled (by another person) to have those beliefs and desires (131)

  • Attempt 4: … provided that those beliefs and desires flow from who that person is (133)