Soft Determinism

Question 1

Overview

Answer 1

• HD too extreme, SD to soften
• Mostly determined, elements argued not to be
• ‘Compatibilism’ -> brings free will and HD together

Question 2

Thomas Hobbes

Answer 2

• ‘Classical SD’ -> all human choices (inc moral) completely determined by causation
• Psych + bio came later, also support
• Could appear same as HD (all human choices determined)
• Difference = internal + external causes

Question 3

Internal Cause

Answer 3

• Choice person internally makes (will)
• E.g. thinking whether to hold door open for teacher or not
• 100% determined by determining factors (phil, psych, bio)
• Holding door open = determined internal cause, not freely willed decision

Question 4

External Cause

Answer 4

• Forced by other person to do something against will (determined internal cause)
• E.g. want to hold open door, other student pushes out of way, cannot fulfil determined will

Question 5

Classical Soft Determinism

Answer 5

• Determined internal cause
• No external cause
• Free to from external interference

Question 6

Hobbes conculsion

Answer 6

• SD = liberty (unrestrained) to do as ‘will’ wants
• Not same as being uncaused (‘will’ determined by causation)
• Analogy -> people like river flowing down channel, no choice but to follow channel, at liberty to flow within channel

Question 7

Hard Determinism

Answer 7

• Determined internal cause
• External cause present
• Not free to carry out determined internal cause

Question 8

Arthur Schopenhauer Quote

Answer 8

“Man is free when he chooses what he wants, but he cannot will what he wants”

Question 9

A.J. Ayer Overview

Answer 9

• “There is some causal explanation of my choice: and in that case we are led back to determinism”
• Empirically studied language differences in SD and HD
• Logical positivism to empirically illustrate difference

Question 10

SD - ‘caused’

Answer 10

• Moral situation SD in nature, MA uses ‘caused’ to describe event
• E.g. ‘caused’ to hold door open for teacher

Question 11

HD - ‘forced’

Answer 11

• HD moral situation, MA uses ‘forced’
• E.g. wanted to hold open door, ‘forced’ by other student away from door

Question 12

Ayer Analogy

Answer 12

• If he walked across room because someone compelled him, observers = not acting freely, ‘forced’ movement completely determined
• Walked across room without being compelled, observers assume cause as all actions ‘willed’ by MA
• Not say forced, no external force when walking across room

Question 13

Implications on moral responsibility

Answer 13

• Only aspect of free will = if actions not forcibly stopped
• ‘Will’ completely determined
• No value in right/wrong, no ability to control ‘willed’ actions
• No value in blame cannot freely control ‘willed’ moral actions
• Normative ethics no use, MA not free to follow them

Question 14

Peter Vardy

Answer 14

• Some internal determining factors can be overcome
• MA identifies how they are determined by internal causes using intellect
• With effort, can attempt to overcome, e.g. recognise ‘conditioned’ to be impatient, can sometimes stop themselves, gains some freedom
• Never recognise/control all determining factors, never truly free

Question 15

Peter Vardy Implications

Answer 15

• Humas ideas of morality have some value
• MA can be blamed for some of immoral actions
• Normative ethics sometimes useful as moral guides

Question 16

Peter Vardy Problem

Answer 16

• Identifying which actions determined by free choice/determined by internal causes
• Soft Determinists would have to agree
• Impossible due to complexities of predestination, causality, genetics, behaviourism