I will pay for the following essay Everything is as it is because of freewill, not because of an omniscient God (Philososphy paper). The essay is to be 3 pages with three to five sources, with in-text

I will pay for the following essay Everything is as it is because of freewill, not because of an omniscient God (Philososphy paper). The essay is to be 3 pages with three to five sources, with in-text citations and a reference page.

I will argue that the soft determinist view of freedom is the most plausible, for not only does it take into account moral responsibility, but it also provides an explanation for a person’s free actions. Compatibilism is the view that claims that every action has a causal explanation, yet we have freedom to act upon them. Moreover, for a compatibilist, “a free action is one that is caused by the person’s beliefs and desires, provided that those beliefs and desires flow from who the person is” (Sider 130). So if all causal relationships have specific laws that govern them, how can there be freedom? Sider tells us that “a free action is one that is caused in the right way” (127). Similarly, an action is free if the agent “could have done otherwise” (Ayer 2). Take for instance the following example: I drink alcohol as a result of my own choice. So my act of drinking alcohol is voluntary. Furthermore, my choice is not due to peer pressure. So the immediate cause of my choice must be internal to me. Now while I was walking to the nearest bar to get a drink, I bumped into a friend of mine who asked me if I wanted to go and watch a movie. I could have gone with my friend if I really did not want a drink. So I would have acted otherwise had I chosen to, but I did not, so my action is caused the right way. Herein, my actions are caused but are free, for I could have done otherwise, had I chosen to do so. ...

Consider the following example: I got up in the morning, but because I felt tired, I went back to sleep for a while. Then I heard someone knocking and so I got up from bed, not knowing that I was running late for school already. Rushing to leave the house, I packed my bags and got dressed. Since the school bus already had gone ahead. I had to walk to school. Suddenly, while I was walking, someone snatched my knapsack from my shoulders. The snatcher was too quick that I did not even bother chasing him. When I got to school, I rushed in my philosophy class. At that time, my professor was collecting our final take home exams, so he did not notice me coming in late, but when he asked for my exam, I told him it was stolen. But it was no use. I failed for my finals. An hour later, I was called by the principal, it was my mom, she’s been trying to call me since I left home because she heard that a young boy got run over by a car. According to the newscaster, the young boy was me, as shown in the school identification card in the bag of the victim. Of course, my mom knew that it could not be me but she still got worried that my bag was found with the victim. Given the circumstances, am I responsible for the death of the young boy? How about my failure in class? Was it my fault that my bag got stolen? A hard determinist would respond by saying that it is not my fault, since I had no control over what transpired. It was an effect of a prior event that could not have been done otherwise. Thus, we have no freedom and responsibility over circumstances such as this. A libertarian on the other hand would answer me that it is my fault since I made a free choice of going back to sleep this morning.