well-known + complex debate

an unanswered question that confronts the morality of law, politics, religion, relationships, feelings of guilt + personal achievements

address stimulus

Thesis: freedom + determinism coexist + function together

nothing else could have happened, as what occurred had to

entirely eliminates the possibility of free will

idea that human actions + choices = result of a chain of causes

2 key factors within determinism = biology + society

the opposite of free will

prompted by the stimulus, I will explore the ideas of determinism, libertarianism + compatibilism

from a compatibilist stance, I will simultaneously support both determinism + a particular definition of freedom, that fits within the determined framework

determinism acknowledges a bleak sense of place in the world + a lack of personal authority

opposing this is libertarianism, which proposes humans as free agents that escape the laws of nature + causation the the material world is subjected to

nature vs. nurture

we can't act freely + make choices due to economic + social determinism

condemned to this system of subjection

social deterministic philosopher

actions determined + justified by the roles people play within capitalist society

reach a state of intertia, succumbing to the predetermined world

make our own personal meaning to life rather than discover it

humans then have the task of creating their own essence

we are born with complete freedom + consciousness

existence precedes essence

20th C existential libertarian

condemned to be free - we have no choice

innately + infinitely responsible for our own destiny

act of not choosing is a choice in itself

no excuses / claims that things 'make' us behave in a certain way

confidently argues humans = radically free

accepts we're thrown into external circumstances (facticity): cultural, social + historical context

so much so, there's almost no recognition for the absence of freedom

acceptance of their role in the social system actively reinforces their own alienation

biological determinism provides the chromosomal gender of individual

however, Simone de Beauvoir: "one is not born but rather becomes, woman"

gender determinism arguably straddles biological + social causes

eg. homosexuals / transgender men/women who might argue they didn't choose their sexuality

only left with probabilities for various outcomes

regardless of how much knowledge is obtained

in no way determined by the past

behaviour of tiny particles emphasises you can't predict their future location with certainty

confidence is well-founded, however, I question elements of his bold claim regarding one's facticity

does a medically depressed individual have the choice to think freely without being confined by the condition?

if an individual is unable to determine what they think / intend next until the moment that thought / intention arises, where is the freedom in that?

in situations like these, i struggle to believe that we're truly capable of transcending facticity + shaping identity through choice

thus, childhood trauma, social circumstances + genetic make-up = no justification

argues we can transcend facticity

biological determinism + social conditioning combine to create gender labels that are arguably beyond our choice + control

the argument for inevitable outcomes leaves little reason to strive for achievements

deterministic approach not only eliminates moral responsibility, but also idea of earning one's success

but does this argument for randomness necessarily support alternative argument of libertarianism?

Strawson - by disproving determinism we aren't proving the truth of libertarianism