Is Free Will Compatible with Determinism?

Is Free Will Compatible with Determinism?

Does determinism rule out the possibility of free will? The philosophical community has been debating this topic for quite some time. The author Michael Huemer claims that "free will is incompatible with determinism" (Huemer, 2016). However, in "The Value of Believing in Something," Kathleen Vohs. Free Will: Why Spreading Fate-Based Beliefs Makes People More Dishonest about going through the motions of life without giving much thought to the big picture or the minute details of any one day or why it turns out the way it does" (Vohs & Schooler, 2008). According to their claims, it is up to each person to determine how their day will go. Nonetheless, there may be others who disagree with this understanding and argue that the course of your day and life is already set in stone. The main difference is between choice and predestination; between randomness and preplanning. To comprehend reality, many philosophers' assumptions were made about the nature of life at the outset, when people were just beginning to ponder where the universe was. Determinism is a philosophical view that holds that all events, including free-willed choices, are ultimately predetermined, decided by what previously existed. In his article "Free Will and Determinism," Michael Huemer "Nothing happens by chance; there is a reason for everything that happens," says Minority Report's world narrator, justification and absolute need" (Huemer, 2016). Each individual makes and controls their independent of external factors, and takes responsibility for their conduct. Arguments over the major philosophical questions 'Minority Report' is a short fiction based on a central conflict between free will and determinism. Stephen Spielberg's film version is based on the novel by Philip K. Dick. That's one of the main problems the movie asks if a free will has any influence on the future or if everything is already written. 

To put it simply, "free will" refers to the state of affairs in which the outcomes of our choices and deeds are unavoidable. So, if something happened as a result of free will, it did not have to. So as an example, let us pretend one is strolling along a path of our own free will and, all of a sudden, someone decides to pick up and toss a stone. Atoms in my arm didn't have to move when we did because we might have easily decided not to throw the rock. Given this example, researchers will assume the presence of free will is the correct explanation, showing that an atom was not obligated to act in the manner in which it did. It follows that determinism is false unless our arms would have moved and we would have thrown the rock regardless of our free will. If the future is predetermined, our freedom of choice seems to be in jeopardy. It's in our nature to view ourselves as volitional beings who can decide for themselves. 

A controversy among philosophers regarding whether or not “free will” can exist with determinism has been ongoing for a long period and it is not going to end soon. Defining true freedom as human thinking and acting is at the heart of the dispute, and it stands in contrast to the idea that nature ultimately limits human beings. In the article “Determinism and Freedom in Stoic Philosophy” by Susanne Bobzien, she argues that “But man acts from judgment because by his apprehensive power he judges that something should be avoided or sought. But because this judgment, in case of some particular act, is not from a natural instinct but from some act of comparison in the reason, therefore he acts from free judgment and retains the power of being inclined to various things” (Bobzien, 1999). To think deeply and abstractly is one of man's greatest strengths analyze the potential outcomes of his next steps: 

“I conceive that nothing is taken at the beginning from itself, from the action of some other immediate agent without itself. And that therefore, when the first man hath an appetite or will do something, to which immediately before he has no appetite or will, the cause of his will is not the will itself, but something else not in his own disposing of. So, what whereas it is out of controversy, that of voluntary actions the will is the necessary cause, and by this which is said, the will is also caused by other things whereof it disposed of not, it followed, that voluntary actions have all of them necessary causes, and therefore are necessitated" (Bobzien, 1999).

As such, it is difficult to define determinism, however, Boszien provides a useful definition, that it is impossible for something to originate from nothing, and that all effects must have preexisting causes. 

It would appear that the argument between "free will" and "determinism" stems from a tension between nature's established universal norms of causality and humans. Apparent ability to choose optimal decisions from among a variety of available options. According to the universal rule of causation, inanimate objects like tables, chairs, and rocks are only acted upon by whatever forces work upon them. When it comes to culture and morals, however, humans appear to be unique. Contrarily, the concept of free will suggests that we have some control over our acts. Simply expressed, determinism is the belief that all events have predetermined causes. The paradox of free will and determinism, as explained by Westbrook in his article "Free Will and Determinism in American Literature," occurs because these two equally clear premises seem to create contradicting consequences” (Westbrook, 2020). Given this, it's crucial to recognize that the compatibility of free will and determinism, or the existence of a free will, is crucial to resolving the free will vs. determinism conundrum. 

In conclusion, the two ideas are incompatible, much like oil and water. There is a conflict between the notions of determinism and free will. Humans have the ability to choose their next action, which shapes their future. Given their incompatibility, the excerpt cannot accommodate both of these points of view. It's either one or the other when it comes to one's beliefs. Whatever happens, the result is our own doing, and we get to decide what to do. Anderton, the antagonist in the film "Minority Report," did not kill Crow despite having numerous opportunities to do so. Despite everything Anderton has done to Crow in the film "Minority Report," he decides not to kill him. “You are not going to kill me? Crow asked” (Spielberg, 2002). After hearing Anderton pose this inquiry, Crow naturally wondered why. The movie shows that humans have free will in that particular scene. More importantly, the actions of our peers speak volumes about them, just as the actions of we speak volumes about them. In Anne Dick’s article “The Search for Philip K. Dick” she states that “On the other hand, I do not see the film as a defense of, nor attack, determinism. Rather, I see it as clearly a defense of free will” (Dick, 2010). The idea of free will is frequently contrasted with that of causation or determinism as though they were incompatible worldviews. Those who believe in determinism as well as those who advocate metaphysical libertarianism will find much to ponder in this film. Anderton, exercising his own free will, said, "Goodbye Crow" (Spielberg, 2002). The film suggests that Anderton possesses free will because he was able to go against the wishes of his internal dialogue partner.

 
References

Bobzien, S. (1999). Determinism and freedom in Stoic philosophy. Clarendon Press. Dick, A. R. (2010). The Search for Philip K. Dick. Tachyon Publications. 

Dick, Phillip K. “The Minority Report.” Adaptations: From Short Story to the Big Screen. Ed. 

Huemer, M. (2016). Free will and determinism in the world of minority report. Science fiction and philosophy: From time travel to superintelligence, 104-113. 

Huiskamp, Gerald. “The Bush Doctrines.” New Political Science 26.3 (2004): 389-15. Minority Report. Dir. Steven Spielberg. Perf. 

Tom Cruise. 2002. Paramount Home Entertainment, 2010. DVD. Publishers. Stephanie Harrison. New York: Three Rivers Press. 2005. 119-51. Minority Report. 

Dir. Steven Spielberg. Perf. Tom Cruise. 2002. Paramount Home Entertainment, 2010. DVD. 

Vohs, K. D., & Schooler, J. W. (2008). The value of believing in free will: Encouraging a belief in determinism increases cheating. Psychological science, 19(1), 49-54. 

Westbrook, P. D. (2020). Free will and determinism in American literature. Wipf and Stock