Free Will And Determinism Essay

The concept of foreswear depart plays an classic part in our apportioning blame or praise, and our holding persons mor every(prenominal)y trusty for their behavior and goions. In the philosophical work devoted to surplus pull up stakes there is no grim definition of this concept scarce it is widely debated to be a condition necessary for moral responsibility. Proponents of determinism, libertarianism, and compatibilism exempt the importance of forego will in their theories each in their particular way (Compatibilism Lecture Notes on Free Will and Determinism).SilenusSilenus, the central hero of Stephen Robinetts The Satyr account, bath be regarded as a staunch pleader of philosophical hard determinism. Like a true determinist, Silenus, a satyr, does non believe he is obligated for his actions and behavior be catch he is the creation of a nonher person, namely Hench. He explains his enormous bear on in ladies as well as his promiscuous behavior by the fact that Hench gave him the supernumerary Y-chromo virtually which became a major determinant of his behavior (Robinett).According to the satyr, only homophile beings can be held obligated for what they do. As Silenus does not consider himself a homosexual being on the one hand, and as he was created by Hench on the other hand, it is the latter that Silenus believes is obligated for him and for anything he does. Silenus maintains that he does not know exactly why he does things and that it is Hench who made him like this, and thus it is Hench who should be held accountable for the way Silenus is and behaves (Robinett). However, nowhere in the invoice does Silenus give any give notice explanation why he believes this. All in all, it is obvious that he does not cargon to the highest degree responsibility at all, hardly considers it a useful, although peculiar, notion, which he often uses to conjure up to Henchs sense of responsibility in order to influence his decisions in his favor.Sile nus desires and inclinations be caused by factors and circle which argon outside his domination and for which, therefore, he should not be held responsible. All he seems to be enkindle in is having sex with ladies and taking a drop every now and because. As we know it from the story, his manage for ladies is caused by the extra Y-chromo virtually that Hench gave him. We can excessively assume that his dis fix to alcohol has something to do with the material he was synthesized from, too.From Silenus deterministic perspective, it follows that he is not accountable for his decisions and actions as they ar not free but are the result of his desires over which he has no control and which he is not able to resist. Libertarians would suggest that Silenus actions are actually free, depend on his reason and volition, and are not pre persistent by any factors much(prenominal) as the extra Y-chromosome. From the compatibilistic perspective, Silenus desires are caused by the above men tioned factors but as he is still free to subscribe in many situations then he should be held responsible for his actions.There is plenty of certainty in the story that Silenus is able to control his behavior. For example, at Mertons offices Silenus became interested in the receptionist, a bird-legged girl, who made him knowledgeablely excited. When she left him after several awkward attempts to have sex with her, Silenus at first of all intended to chase her but then decided to let her go (Robinett). Given the influence of the extra Y-chromosome, the receptionists body must have clouded Silenus mind. However, he was able to control his strong sexual desires at that moment because Hench could hear her screams and come to punish him.Another good example of Silenus ability to control his behavior can be seen during the meeting with Merton. Silenus was constantly interrupting Hench while the latter was talking to Merton. When Hench got angry, he told Silenus to be silent or he wou ld punish him by and by by not feeding him properly. Although Silenus was eager to progress as a disobedient and unreliable creature, he stopped immediately misbehaving himself and annoying Hench because he did involve to eat that night.One more example is a clash between Hench and Silenus which broke out when they came pedestal after the appointment with Merton. When Hench slapped Silenus, the satyr felt like grabbing and throwing his creator across the room. unless Silenus managed to control his choler because he realized that if he hit Hench he would never convince him not to sell him into bondage (Robinett). All these examples show that Silenus can, if he wishes to, control his behavior.The above mentioned examples of Silenus abilities to control his especially violent or un satisfying behavior also show that Silenus is able to draw causal inferences in this story. In these situations he demonstrates his awareness of the possible consequences of his actions (which coul d be disastrous for him) and decides to avoid them. It follows that in most shells Silenus behaves well or does not do unacceptable actions not out of a sense of deep lowstanding of the consequences of such behavior and, what is especially important, responsibility for his actions, but only because he tries to feed punishment. In many other cases (for example, when he strained Audrey to have sex with him), his unacceptable behavior can be explained by the fact that Silenus, as a rational being (and he proves several times in the story that he is indeed a rational being) must realize his moral responsibility for his actions, but also understands that he is likely to escape punishment for them.As a rational being, Silenus is fully capable of drawing causal inferences of his behavior, but his acceptable or unacceptable behavior depends on whether he is likely to be punished for it or baffle certain inconveniences because of it and not on his sense of moral responsibility for his a ctions. In every situation Silenus has the superior whether to follow his inclinations and behave in an unacceptable way or whether to postpone the satisfaction of his desires to a later time. As we can see, in some cases Silenus postpones his aspirations to do certain things, but in other situations he prefers to misbehave himself rather than control himself. So in most cases it would be incorrect to conclude that Silenus could not do other than he did.Silenus is in fact a drunk who avoids responsibility for his drinking habits. But the question of Silenus being a drunk should not be restricted only to this vice. He is also fond of having sex and likes being fed well. It would be fairer to describe Silenus as a person who has some bad habits and preferences (like most globe have) and tends to satisfy some of his vicious needs and inclinations but who does not want to be held responsible for his actions. For Silenus, it seems easier to enjoy life and satisfy his desires than to control them and be responsible for his actions.Silenus holds clear deterministic views on the extent of his moral responsibility for his actions. Determinists believe that human behavior, decisions, and actions are determined and caused by preceding occurrences (Determinism). If all human actions are influence then there is no free will and humans are not morally responsible for what they do. Contemporary determinists also believe that human behavior is determined by some external causes which are beyond mans control, particularly genetic and environmental factors (Geisler).We do not know exactly whether Robinetts Silenus has ever heard of determinism and free will, but he successfully applies deterministic views to explain his behavior. He believes his behavior is determined and caused by his genetic constitution that was prone to him by Hench and that his inclinations that are caused by this constitution cant be controlled.Silenus maintains that if he is not responsible for wh at he is made from, then he cant be responsible for what he does. Although Silenus carriage about behavior and responsibility corresponds to the views of proponents of determinism, it is obvious that Silenus arguments do not at all reflect his philosophical deterministic rank in life, but rather are a convenient excuse for change moral responsibility for his actions to others.Silenus versus HenchSilenus I am not responsible for what I am and Henchs You are responsible for what you do are in fact compatible. Hench created Silenus with certain predispositions which imbibe him likely to behave and act in a particular way in certain situations. Hench is the author of Silenus predispositions and the one who shaped Silenus character. Silenus has energy to do with the material he was made from and he is right when he says that he is not responsible for what he is.But Silenus is also a rational being and in several cases he demonstrates that his decisions are based on reasoning. He is also able to control and guide his behavior. It follows that it is Silenus, not Hench, who can be held responsible for what he does. So both Silenus and Henchs positions are correct and compatible. In this story, the problem is that Silenus is not responsible for what he is and extends this irresponsibility to what he does.In the beginning of the story, Hench agrees with Silenus view of the extent of his moral responsibility. In his discussion with Audrey, Hench maintains that as Silenus creator he is fully responsible for him. Hench does not consider Silenus a human being and maintains that he is not able to take care of himself and assume responsibility for what he does. Hench heretofore goes so far as to state that he is responsible for everything Silenus is or does because Silenus is exactly what he, Hench, made him (Robinett).However, we can also see Hench criticize Silenus for his unacceptable behavior, because he does not control his desires, and also suggest that Silenus sh ould be responsible for his actions (Robinett). It seems there is a certain contradiction in Henchs belief of responsibility for Silenus. On the one hand, he feels responsible for Silenus actions because he is his creator. On the other hand, although in Henchs view Silenus is not a human being, he is at least a rational being as he often demonstrates his ability to express thoughts and explain things that are based on reasoning.Hench believes that Silenus should at least emphasize to be responsible for his actions and control them (Robinett). We may assume from what we read in the story that there is some struggle in Henchs mind as to whether only he should be held responsible for Silenus actions or whether this responsibility should be shared between both him and Silenus. As we read on, at the end of the story Hench comes to the conclusion that Silenus should be held accountable for his behavior, too. Although this conclusion is reached on the basis of his personal grievance again st Silenus (because Silenus had sex with Audrey), it is clear that now Hench is firm in his opinion that he is responsible for what Silenus is, but not for what Silenus does.GorrMichael Gorr is a proponent of the compatibilistic theory. Unlike libertarians, who maintain that humans have free will which is incompatible with determinism, compatibilists believe that determinism and free will exist and are in fact compatible ideas. According to this belief, free will is not a persons ability to make a certain choice independently of prior causes and even sots, but a persons ability to make when he or she is not forced to do it. Compatibilists do not deny that our choices are predetermined, but they emphasize that the choices we make are examples of free will if we are not forced to make them. But if we are forced to make whatever choices we make, then this is an example of a lack of free will (Compatibilism and Incompatibilism).If a persons action is coerced, then this person is not r esponsible for it. But if a persons action is not coerced, that is, under certain circumstances the person can do otherwise, then this person is accountable for the action. Gorrs compatibilistic position is seen in his example of knocking down Jones. Gorr maintains that in the case where another person pushes him and makes him bump into Jones, he should not be held responsible for his action as its consequence is not a result of his intention or choice. In the case where he deliberately bumps into Jones and injures him, he is accountable for his behavior because he could do otherwise. Gorr states that we are responsible for our actions only when we desire for these actions to occur (Gorr).Gorr accepts, unlike libertarians, the deterministic universal causation, but he rejects the deterministic belief that humans are not to be held responsible for their actions because their actions are determined and caused by factors which are beyond their control. He agrees with Hench who states a t the end of the story that Silenus is responsible for his behavior which is the result of his desires even though he is not responsible for his genetic constitution that determines and causes his desires.Gorr maintains that it is not necessary to be responsible for ones desires in order to be responsible for ones behavior. For Gorr, it is more important to have control over ones actions and not to have control over the causes of these actions. So long as we have control over our actions and it depends on our choice whether these actions will occur or not, Gorr concludes, we are responsible for these actions. And Silenus, regardless of his genetic constitution and environment, should be held responsible for his actions (Gorr).ConclusionWe can part reject determinism as philosophical proposition and do not agree with the belief that whatever we do is predetermined and we cant control it or do otherwise and are, therefore, not to be held responsible for what we do. But it seems scat he to reject or neglect the notion of universal causation which determinists believe is constitutive(a) to their theory. It would be wrong to deny that some events are caused by other preceding events, and the latter were caused by earlier events, and so on. It seems there exists an unbroken causal chain of which humans are part.Similarly, it would be wrong to deny the importance and influence of factors such as heredity or upbringing on how we make our decisions or choose to behave in a particular situation. So every event has its cause and every human action is also caused by certain factors. What does seem important in this case is, as Gorr points out, the difference in the kind of causation (Gorr). Our genetic make-up and the environment are important, but not the only, factors which predetermine or guide our behavior as we can often control them and choose to do otherwise than these factors predispose us to do.Personally, I cant accept the deterministic position that everythin g that exists or occurs has a sufficient reason for existing or occurring as it exists or occurs, and not otherwise (Causal Determinism). It is hard to believe that human actions are predetermined, are not free, and cant be changed (hard determinism), or that there is chance they could be changed (soft determinism). I do not particularly like the idea that since human actions are not free humans are not to be held morally responsible for them because in my view this promotes certain moral chaos. I am not convinced by the indeterministic position that all human acts are uncaused.I share the libertarian belief that humans actually do have free will, but like Gorr, I do not believe it is incompatible with deterministic causation. That is why I am most inclined to accept compatibilism which is something in the middle between determinism and libertarianism and does not disparage deterministic causation and accepts free will, and therefore, moral responsibility. I believe that my actions can be in fact predetermined by several factors, but in many cases I still have the possibility to choose between two and more options, and that I should be held responsible for whatever the consequences of my choice are.BIBLIOGRAPHY1. Causal Determinism. Retrieved January 27, 2008 from the foundation wide Web http//plato.stanford.edu/entries/determinism-causal/2. Compatibilism. Retrieved January 27, 2008 from the World Wide Web http//plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/3. Compatibilism and Incompatibilism. Retrieved January 27, 2008 from the World Wide Web http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism4. Determinism. Retrieved January 27, 2008 from the World Wide Web http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determinism5. Geisler, N. Freedom, Free Will, and Determinism. Retrieved January 27, 2008 from the World Wide Web http//www.mb-soft.com/believe/text/determin.htm6. Gorr, M. Being and Doing Some eyeshots about Responsibility. Though Probes.7. Lecture Notes on Free Will and Determinism. Ret rieved January 27, 2008 from the World Wide Web http//www.sfu.ca/philosophy/swartz/freewill1.htm8. Robinett, S. The Satyr. Thought Probes.