Analysis of Individual Free Will, Existentialism, Determinism
Analyzing our individual free will can be very intriguing and can almost reach the point of being paradoxical. Ultimately, free will determines the level of responsibility we claim for our actions. Obviously, if outside forces determine our choices, we cannot be held responsible for our actions. However, if our choices are made with total freedom than certainly we must claim responsibility for our choices and actions.
The readings I chose offered two quite opposite theories on individual human freedom, determinism vs. existentialism. In comparing these two theories the contrasts are quite outstanding.
Evidently, some philosophers felt that human beings did not really have a free will. This view, defined as determinism held that certain casual laws rule what occurs in the universe. There are two major forms of determinism, including hard determinism and soft determinism.
Hard determinism taught that each of our actions is determined by factors beyond our control such as heredity and environment. From this point of view there can be no real moral responsibility for our actions if our actions were determined by factors beyond our control. There is a complete denial of personal free will in hard determinism.
The Essay on Determinism vs Free will
... however, one of its sole themes is determinism versus free will. Sophocles suggests that every individual is not only born with a preordained ... not possess the ability of making any choices. The place and setting of his birth determined the outcome of his parents abandoning ... the movement of the universe surrounding us, and accord our actions so we are not fighting the current, but moving along ...
Soft determinism, however, appears to combine determinism and free will. It teaches that all human actions are determined by such things as early childhood experiences thus relinquishing us from total responsibility for our actions caused by such determining factors. However, if my actions were the result of my own reasoning exclusive of outside factors than I must take responsibility for my choices.
In total contrast with determinism, existentialism professes the complete freedom of the human being. The particular reading I read dealt with atheistic existentialism, this view of personal freedom rejected a belief in God, feeling that it would be incompatible with the uncertainty and harsh reality of life during the time of two wars. This view shared that a person was not ruled by heredity or environment but was always free at any time to make his own choices. Due to the denial of God, this theory held that there were no existing moral laws, thus, individuals were free to determine their own human nature through choices for which they stand accountable (existentialism, in general, emphasizes what makes each life a unique personal experience as opposed to any existing moral laws).
“Authentic” living involves free choices that allows the individual to become his own person. The big difference between existentialism and the previously discussed views is the emphasis on the freedom of the person to do and be anything with no limits and all choices are free.
Any attempt to avoid freedom of choice would be considered “bad-faith”, or living in an inauthentic way. Examples of this would be saying that we could not help ourselves or that we are not really responsible for what we did thus placing responsibility on someone or something else.
Existentialism cannot include “groupthink”, which includes large organizations such as church. If you belong to a church, there are some moral issues you must believe in and some you should not. The same is true for memberships in groups and gangs. To commit to such circumstances would be acting in “bad-faith”.
The Essay on Free Will and Determinism Can Coexist
Discuss the claim that we humans have no real freedom of choice. Throughout history, the problem of freewill vs. determinism has sparked major debates between philosophers. The debate between freewill and determinism stems from the apparent conflict between the universal rule of causality that is deeply rooted in nature, and between the apparent ability of human beings to choose between multiple ...
Furthermore, love automatically would put a person in “bad-faith”. This is because once we are in love we might modify our opinions and actions as a way to insure we don’t lose our loved one or ones. An authentic existence would be impossible if we had to check our actions against the imagined judgement of the person who fulfills our need for true love.
Obviously, a huge contrast exists between determinism and existentialism. After much contemplation, I personally would have to place my opinion of individual free will to the left of soft determinism and to the right of existentialism. I have come to this conclusion because of a few definate beliefs I would have to consider. I personally believe in God, who I believe represents all that is good in people. I also believe that early childhood experiences and heredity factors such as personality can have an influence on the choices we make. Our choices are generally made out of love or fear. As we mature, hopefully, we can sift through our influences and sort out the love or fear involved in our choices. Ultimately, I feel that although there can be many circumstances that interfere with our choices and actions we all have the power to make choices for ourselves and learn from those choices. This could be why God gave us, human beings, the precious gift of our own free will.
