Abstract
The
question of whether man is free to make choices is important if they are to be
held
responsible for their actions. We must define free
will, and then look at the differences between
free will and determinism. There are contradictions
between these two concepts. Determinists
say that man is not free, because his actions are determined
by events that preceded the action.
They believe that all actions preformed by man are
either caused or pre-determined. Do people
have free will or are they controlled by outside
sources as well as internal sources? “The basic
idea is that when we are interested in free will, we
are not primarily interested in causal origins,
but self determination, which is also the main
presupposition in the practice of holding people
responsible.”[1] It
is an important question, because its implications are far reaching. The
implications cover everything from legal, ethical, scientific,
and religious issues to everything
in between. Human moral responsibility is very
important. Did the sovereign God create
determined man or man with a free will?
Keywords: Free will, Determination, moral responsibility.
Introduction
“Everything is determined, the beginning as well as the end, by forces
over which we have no
control. It is determined for the insect as well as
the star. Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic
dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune intoned in the
distance by an invisible piper.”[2]
There
are many schools of thought on this topic. There is metaphysical determinism,
economic determinism, ethical, and historical determinism,
as well as self- determinism.
There are others, and they consist of the idea that
free will is non-existent, because all actions are
pre-determined. They all differ in the way they
believe it is achieved.
Augustine
says in The City of God, “The choice
of the will, then, is genuinely free only if it is
not subservient to faults and sins. God gave it true
freedom, and now that it has been lost,
through its own fault, it can be restored only by
him who had the power to give it in the
beginning”[3] Pelagius on the other hand believed that God
created humanity with unconditional
free will and moral responsibility, but to have this
free will there had to be the choice to do good
and evil. Calvinism and Arminianism are also two
schools of thought that are popular, and are
polar opposites. Calvinism holds that man does not
have free will while Arminianism goes in the
other direction. There will always be extremes, and
so one searches for truth, because that is
where we find freedom, but the debate over free will
and determinism will continue. We have to
face the challenge and look at the information
available.
The
implications of free will are so far reaching this is a very important topic to
discuss. Is
man responsible for his actions and behaviors? The
legal system definitely will hold a person
responsible for their actions, but there are
exceptions when mental issues arise. Does man
merely have the appearance of free will? Choices
have to be made daily. To go left or right, to
purchase this or that, to act responsibly or
irresponsibly are these really choices without prior
cause. We consider an action before we perform it.
This would be the action of free will. Once
the decision is made we then act. Are we responsible
for that action?
Definition
of Free Will
The
dictionary gives a simple definition for free will,” The power of acting
without constraint
of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one’s
own discretion.”[4]
The question of free will is not
that simple It could be said to be, “The power of
the agents to be the ultimate creators and
sustainers of their own ends and purposes.”[5] As
we discuss free will and determinism we must
keep in mind that this is only a small section of
the many discussions that are carried on about
the topic of free will.
Legal Aspects of Free Will
It is
important to look at the legal side of this topic as the government considers
us to be free
at least to a certain extent. As citizens of the
United States we have, according to the Bill of
Rights, certain freedoms. “Congress shall make no
law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or
abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the
rights of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petition the government for a redress of
grievances.”[6] We
throw the word freedom around without being fully appreciative of the
freedoms we have. I read a bumper sticker that said,”
For those who fought for it, freedom has a
flavor the protected will never know.” Man will
fight and lay down his life to maintain freedom.
It is a thing that is highly prized. Free will is
part of the process of freedom. No one likes to feel
that they are controlled and manipulated by
anything. Choices are important if man is to be held
responsible for his action.
Freedom
and free will are very important, and so we need to realize that there are
legal
ramifications to the privilege of being free and
having free will. The legal definition for freedom
is, “The state of being free; liberty; self-determination;
absence of restraint; the opposite of
slavery. The power of acting, in the character of
moral personality, according to the dictates of
the will,
without other check, hindrance, or prohibition than such as may be imposed by
just and
necessary laws and the duties of social life. The
prevalence, in the government and constitution
of a country, of such a system of laws and
institutions as secure civil liberty to the individual
citizen.”[7] All
of these agencies consider man to have free will, so does man really have free
will?
Science and Free Will
“Those who deny the existence of free will
view human thoughts, desires, decisions, and
intentions as causally impotent phenomena, even
though our common appeal to moral
responsibility in societal life rules out material
determinism tout court.”[8] If
humans are not
causally responsible for what they do it would leave
them without a clear perception of
themselves as human. It is difficult to imagine that
the present and future is predetermined by
nature and neural conditions as free will is
experienced and exercised each day. Thomas Nagel
feels that the only way to understand free agency is
to view it from a psychophysical category
that is not reducible to physical or mental terms.
Libet found,”that the will can intervene prior to
executing a motor act, allowing for a conscious veto
to the proposed action. For Libet, this meant
that conscious free will is limited to controlling
whether a voluntary act occurs, with its initiation
following a
“bubbling up” of unconscious initiatives in the brain and the conscious will
simply
select which conceivable action(s) we perform.”[9]
Meyer discusses a sort of ethics that appears to
be built into the human brain. “An agent-causal
account of free will rules out the possibility that
we merely experience the voluntary actions we
perform.”[10]
“Walter Glannon reminds us that we
hold people responsible for their behaviors, not
their brains or minds.”[11]
People are capable of
weighing pros and cons to come to a decision. They
can exercise active control over their
actions. When a person acts without social or
biological interference they are exercising free
will. This would be free will with autonomy.
Religion and Free Will
“The
notion should be distinguished from free action, and not simply because free
will is a
power. To act freely is to be unhindered in the
pursuit of your purposes (which are usually
expressed by intentions); to will freely, in the traditional
sense, is to be the ultimate creator
(prime mover, so to speak) of your own purpose.”[12] There
are many times in the word where
God says choose. He shows that options do exist. He
leaves man to choose what he will. God
laid out the results of the choices as life or
death. Genesis 4:6-7 says,”So the Lord said to Cain,
“Why are you angry?”And why has your countenance
fallen? “If you do well, will you not
be accepted? And if you do not well, sin lies at the
door. And its desire is for you, but you should
rule over it.” This brings us back to the question
of what caused the person to make this choice.
How far back was this choice determined which brings
us back to determinism?”Determinism is
the belief that all human actions are the result of
antecedent factors or causes.”[13]
“If there really
is no power in man of free choice toward good, or,
as some say, no freedom either of good or ill,
what do these words mean: “if you are willing”; “if
you refuse”? It would be more consistent to
say, “if I am willing”; “if I refuse, “and, as most
of these things are said to sinners, I do not see
how one can avoid attributing to them also a will in
some way free to choose good, unless we
prefer to call this an action of thought or a
movement of the soul rather than the will, since the
will implies decision and is born of judgment.”[14]
One
cannot separate free will from moral responsibility. They automatically go hand
in hand.
The responsibility for an action is going to be put
on the one who performed the action. It is the
way that it would be judged either at personal or
legal levels. The fact is that one’s beliefs may
come into play when choices arise, but action is not
compelled. The question is upfront whether
to act or not to act. Moral responsibility is the
person being held accountable for their standard of
behavior or beliefs concerning what they deem
acceptable for them to do. Geisler says,”One of
the things God gave us was a good power called free
will. God basically said to Adam, “You
are
free”
(Gen.
2:16).Humankind intuitively recognizes freedom as being good; only those who
usurp and abuse power deny it, and yet even these
value it and seek it for themselves.”[15]
To have
free will we must have a choice of good or evil, but
the choice is ours. Romans 2:6 says, “Who
will render to each one according to his
deeds.” “The fact of freedom is good,
even though some
acts of freedom are evil. God caused the former, and
we are the cause of the latter.”[16]
Determinism
The debate of free will
vs. determinism is only one side of a many sided debate. Fate and
predestination could be
very detrimental to any idea of free will. Fate would cause events that
were outside of the
person’s control caused by a higher power, and predestination is the divine
ordination of all that
happens. Either way it does not leave much hope of a man making free
personal choices.
Determinism implies that everything that is done is caused, and so cannot be an
act of free will. It
reminds me of the butterfly effect. In the butterfly effect the butterfly
flutters
its wings, and causes a
slight atmospheric change that causes a chain of events that cause a
storm. That might be
pushing the point, but it does imply that everything is caused.
Theologists and philosophers have long debated
the issue of whether man is truly free. There
are those who will
maintain that man does have free will, and those who feel free will is merely
and illusion. Those who
believe that free will is an illusion will claim that all of man’s actions
are determined by
actions that have already happened. Everything that man does is caused.
Man’s actions are basically
cause and effect. N. L. Geisler says in “Freedom, Free Will and
Determinism”, in his
definition of determinism:
“Since humans are part
of this causal chain, their actions are also determined by antecedent
causes. Some of the causes are the environment, and the person’s genetic
make-up. These are so determinative of what a person does that no one could
rightly say that a given human action could have been preformed otherwise than
it in fact was preformed. Thus, according to determinism, Bob’s sitting in the
brown chair rather than the blue sofa is not a free choice but is fully
determined by previous factors.”[17]
All man’s actions are caused by preceding
events. Will has nothing to do with it. Determinism
basically implies that
everything is dependent on causal laws. We may not be able to identify the
cause, but it still
exists.
Defining the Different Forms of Determinism
There are different
forms of Determinism that need to be looked at. The many different
philosophies of
determinism that have risen up over the centuries have many commonalities as
well as differences. They
differ in the way they advance a solution to the debate over free will.
Each one believes that
man’s action are determined (basically cause and effect), but they each
put forth different
methods to achieve this. There points of view differ, and so need to be
defined. Several of the
different forms will be discussed here.
Hard Determinism
Hard determinism or Metaphysical
determinism argues that man’s freedom of choice is an
illusion. Holbach felt
that there were laws put in place that acted on the natural world which man
is part of, and so is also
subject to these laws. The causes that determine man’s choices can occur
in the recent past or
in the very distant past. They are not obvious, so man is deceived into
believing that he has
free choice. His actions are unavoidable, and so there is no room for moral
responsibility. Man’s
actions are determined by external factors as well as genetics and
environmental
causes.
Soft Determinism
Soft determination
which is also referred to as compatibilism does agree with cause and effect
of determinism, but man
is free and morally responsible when there is nothing external to
interfere with their
actions. They take this position, because they believe that there is a need for
moral responsibility.
They believe that determinism is compatible with free will. It goes
something like this:
man is able to act freely according to his impulses, but the impulses are
determined, so if
everything is already decided was not the impulse that he had also
determined. They do believe that everything is caused, and
the future is determined. A man
makes the only choice
he possibly could. Both hard determinists and compatiliblists both realize
that moral
responsibility is important, and so they try to work this in to their
philosophy. William
James and Immanuel Kant
felt that the word freedom was not used appropriately, and that this
was done to change its
appearance although it still remained determinism. It is referred to as soft
determinism, because it
suggest that freedom and determinism are compatible.
Self Determination
The person is the first cause of his or
her choices and action. This would make them
responsible for those
actions.” Just as no outside force caused God to create the world, so no
outside force causes
people to choose certain actions. For humans are created in God’s image,
which includes the
possession of free will.”[18]
They do agree that heredity and environment can
influence a person’s
behavior, but they do not agree that they are major determinant. Humans are
the ones who make the
decision to act. “Therefore, it seems that some form of self determinism
is the most compatible
with the biblical view of God’s sovereignty and human responsibility.”[19]
Indeterminism
Human behavior is
completely uncaused. Therefore, the act could have been different then it
was. ”There are no
simultaneous causes of men’s actions. Hence, all of man’s acts are uncaused;
any given human act
could have been otherwise. Some indeterminists extend their view beyond
human affairs to the
entire universe….Indeterminism is unacceptable for a Christian. For if
indeterminism is true,
then either the existence of God or any causal connection between God
and the universe would
have to be denied.”[20]
Fatalism
Fate renders man helpless before its
power. It determines his destiny leaving him with no
choice, but to move
forward on the path he has been forced to tread. “It connotes not the absence
of freedom, but the
subjection of freedom. It is the transcendent necessity in which freedom is
Entangled (Tillich).
Fate is blind, inscrutable, and inescapable.”[21]
Basically whatever will be will
be. It is similar to
predestination. Everything is already determined, and man must just flow with
it. Some of the philosophers
that have fatalistic views according to Bloesch are: John Stuart
Mills, Oswald Spengler,
Herbert Spencer, and Arthur Schopenhauer.
Metaphysical Determinism
Metaphysics states that
all things are interrelated. The entire universe and everything that is
in it is subject to the
laws that exist to hold everything together, and cause it to flow in a kind of
unity. Man is part of
this natural universe which means that he also is subject to the laws that
have been put in place
to control it. All actions can be traced back to the laws that order the
universe and everything
in it. Therefore through these laws we are able to find the cause even
though it started in
the distant past. Metaphysics would suggest that man’s actions cannot be
isolated since he is
part of the whole.
Metaphysical determinism implies that
nothing happens without a cause and effect. Causality
is a part of the
natural world, and nothing happens without a reason. Choices are already
determined by prior
causes that have been placed in action. There is no way to avoid them. The
idea that man has free
will and autonomy is not to even be considered since he is part of the
natural world, and all
causes are subject to natural laws. Man’s mental, emotional, and physical
actions are determined
by causal laws. Even his choices are predetermined by natural laws. It is a
part of hard
determinism. Benedict Spinoza was one of the philosophers that contributed to
this
theory.
Economic Determinism
Economic determinism
deals with the economic position in any given society. The economic
position will determine
what people within the society will do. As the economic situations
changes within society
so does the social, political, and intellectual forms that exist. It is this
that
directs all human
activity, and determines the distribution of wealth. Marx’s transformed Georg
Hegel’s philosophy to a
materialistic view. “The most militant philosophy of history on a global
scale has been
dialectical materialism, the philosophy on which communism is based.”[22]
Ethical Determinism
Ethics are the moral principles that a
person acts upon, and can be held responsible for.
Ethical determination
would hold that these actions are not free, but are caused or predetermined.
This implies that man would do what he determines
is good. A man would not do evil unless he
saw some point of good
in the action. Man will not do an action that he has not convinced
himself is in some way beneficial. Before acting he will work to make
it seem good to his
moral principle.
Socrates and Plato determined that ignorance is the cause of evil acts. An
ethical
determinist would
realize that an action whether right or wrong was predetermined which is set
as it should be. The
action is being preformed because of a chain reaction that started in the
past and moved forward.
It is all based on natural law.
Theological Determinism
Theological determinism states everything
that happens is predestinated by a sovereign God.
There are two versions
of theological determinism. The first one is foreknowledge. All things are
known by God. He knows
the past and the future, so the future can only be what God knows it to
be. “God knows with
certainty what flows from a necessary order of causes…He infallibly
knows the entire future
of the universe, it must come to pass as he knew it would otherwise, he
would have been wrong,
and an omniscient cannot be wrong.”[23] Romans
8:29 says, “For whom
he did foreknow, he
also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his son, that he might
be the first born among
many brethren.”
The second kind would be the concept of
divine preordination. They suggest that God is the
first cause behind all
human action. All things are preordained which is in effect determinism.
All actions can be
traced back to God who is the first cause. Theological determinism implies
that God, who in his
sovereignty, has determined all things that will happen. All events are set in
motion to guide
humanity toward the will of God for all mankind. It is maintained that man is
responsible for his
actions. It is also a form of causal determination.
Social Determinism
This is the theory that
social interaction is the cause of man’s behavior. They look at social
customs of a society to
determine what behaviors would be most likely. Their behavior would be
caused by a societal
flow of ideas. The actions of the individual are predetermined by the rules
that society imposes on
them.
The Objection to Determinism
Any time the word determinism is placed
behind a word one becomes aware of the fact that
free will has in some
way been eliminated or limited. There are any number of theories that
involve the word
determinism and the elimination of free will. If determinism is true we are
domed to do what we do,
and so should not be held responsible for our actions.”We behave as
we do because of the various
causes that shape us, whether these are genetic or environmental.
We don’t have the
capacity to act outside of the causal connections that link us in every respect
to the rest of the
world.”[24]
“Free choice in this life means”the
ability to do otherwise.” Human are truly free. True
freedom here on earth
is the freedom to accept or reject God’s offer of salvation. In heaven we
will be free from evil;
here we are free to do evil.”[25]
Can One Find Harmony Between
Free Will and Determinism?
Free will and determinism are difficult to
harmonize. Compatibilism attempts to bring the
two together, but even
with their determination to blend the two philosophies it is not
convincing. They hold
that there are not two definitions needed, because the two are compatible.
Compatibilism could be
considered the middle ground between determinism and free will.
Detereminism basically
believes that everything is in place, and nothing can transpire that was
not already determined.
Free will could be defined as choices. There can be choices set before
the individual. Should
he spend the day watching television, or play tennis or better still go to the
mall. It would seem
that the choice is there to be made. There always seem to be choices.
Nothing appears to
interfere with the choice. Compatibilists believe that you will make a certain
choice because of who
you are. Things like genetics and environment will determine your
choices. They are still
saying that all things are determined. Everything was determined before
you were born. If you
are not physically or mentally or emotional constrained then you have a
form of freedom.
It is difficult to separate determinism
and causality. If an action is caused then it is determined
which means it was not
free will. The distance between determinism and free will makes
compatibilism an
illusion. There can be no real harmony, but it will continue to raise a lot of
discussion
Conclusion
The free will and determination discussion
creates a challenge for theologians and
philosophers. It will
continue as man continues to be held responsible for his actions. The
determinists sit in a restaurant
looking at a menu making choices freely of what to order and eat.
No matter how the
discussion goes people around the world will be either suffering the
consequences of their actions
or reaping the rewards for them. Responsibility is very real
and unavoidable. If a
man breaks the laws set in place by man he will be held responsible, and
pay the consequence. If
he breaks the law of God he will be held responsible and pay the
consequences. God gave
man the freedom to choose. Many times through the scriptures God
says choose, and choose
we must. We must choose life or death. He tells us to choose life. “We
are on an adventure; we
are going somewhere, so to speak, as we more faithfully witness and are
conformed to God and
his glory. “Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have
been fully known (1
Cor. 3:12).”[26]
Bibliography
Association, Independence Hall. Bill of Right's.
Index of Historic Documents, Philadelphia: Publishing Electronically,
1995-2014.http://www.ushistory.org/documents/amendments.htm
Augustine. The Cith of
God. New York: Penquin Publishers, 1972.
Bloesch, D.G. "Fate, Fatalism." In Evangelical
Dictionary of Theology 2nd ed., by Walter A. Elwell, 439. Grand Rapids:
Baker Academic, 2001.
Duetschmann, Moritz. Free Will, Indeterminacy,
Self-Determinism. Seminar Paper, Norderstedt Germany: Druck und Bindung:
Books on Demand GmbH, 2007.
Einstein, Albert. 1879-1955.
Erasmus, Luther and. Luther And Erasmus: Free Will
And Salvatioin. Edited by M.A., D.D., A.N. Marlow, M.A. Luther and
ErasmusE. Gordon Rupp. Translated by M.A.,D.D., B. Drewery, M.A. Philip S.
Watson. Vol. XVII. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, MCMLXIX.
Erickson, Millard J. Christian
Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Acabemic, 1998.
Evatt, Chris. The
Myth of Free Will. Sausalito: Cafe Essays, 2010.
Geisler, N.L. "Freedom, Freewill, and
Determinism." In Evangelical Dictionary of Theology 2nd ed., by
Walter A. Elwell, 467-470. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001.
Geisler, Norman L. Choosen
But Free. Bloomington: Bethany House Publishers, 2010.
James, edited and fact
Checked by. "Black's Law DictionaryFree Online Dictionary." Google+.
Http://thelawdictionary.org/freedom/
Kane, Robert. The Significance of
Free Will. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Kapic, Kelly M. A
Little Book For New Theologians. Downer Grove: Intervarsity Press, 2012.
Meyer, John R. "Is
Free Will An Illusion?" Ethics & Medicine, 2011: 85-97.
Plantinga, Alvin. God,
Freedom, and Evil. Grand Rapids: Wm. B.Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1977.
—. Warranted
Christian Belief. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Sons, G. P. Putnam's. The Oxford American College
Dictionary. New York: Oxford University Press Inc, 2002.
Vicens, Leigh C. "Determinism, Human Freedom, and
theConsequences Argument." International Journal for Philosophy of
Religion, 2012: 145-155.
Williams, Clifford. Free
Will and Determinism A Dialog. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company,
1980.
[1] Moritz Duetschmann. Free Will, Indeterminacy And Self-Determination.(Norderstedt
Germany: Druck und
Bindung: Books on Demand GmbH. 2007), 3.
[2]
Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
[3]
Augustine. The City of God. (New
York: Penguin Books, 1972).
[4]
The Oxford American College Dictionary. 2002. By Oxford University press, Inc.
New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons.
[5]
Robert Kane. The Significance of Free
Will. (New York: Oxford University Press. 1996).
[6] “Index of Historic Documents”. Independent
Hall Association. 1995-2014. Philadelphia: Publishing Electronically
http://www.ushistory.org/documents/amendments.htm
[7] “Black’s Law Dictionary Free Online Legal Dictionary”. 2nd ed. Edited and fact checked by
James: Google+.
http://the
lawdictionary.org/freedom/
[8]
John J. Meyer. MS, LTD, STD. “Is Free Will An Illusion.” Ethics & Medicine. Vol. 27(2)85-97(2011): 85-86.
[9]
Ibid., 87.
[10]
Ibid., 89.
[11]
Ibid., 90.
[12] Robert Kane. The Significance of Free Will. (New York: Oxford University Press.
1996).
[13]
N. L. Giesler, “Freedom, Free Will, and Determinism.” Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. 2nd ed. Edited by
Walter A. Elwell. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2011), 467.
[14]
“Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and
Salvation.” The Library of Christian Classics. Editors: John Baillie, John A.
[15]
Norman L. Geisler. Chosen But Free. 3rd
ed. (Bloomington: Bethany House Publishers, 2010), 34.
[16]
Ibid., 35.
[17] Geisler, Freedom, Free Will and Determinism,
467-468.
[18]
Geisler, Freedom, Free Will, and
Determinism. 470.
[19]
Ibid., 470.
[20]
Ibid., 469.
[21] D. G. Bloesch. “Fate, Fatalism”. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. 2nd
ed. Edited by Walter A. Elwell. (Grand
Rapids: Bakers
Academic.2001), 439.
[22]
Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology.2nd
ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic 1998), 389.
[23]
Norman L. Geisler. Chosen But Free.3rd
ed. (Bloomington: Bethany House Publishers. 2010), 20.
[24]
Chris Evatt. The Myth of Free Will. 3rd
ed.( Sausalito: Café Essays. 2010), 129.
[25]
Geisler, Chosen But Free. 21
[26]
Kelly M. Kapic. A Little Book For New
Theologians. (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. 2012), 34-35.
Copyright 2014 by Kathleen Hadley
All rights reserved
