Call/WhatsApp: +1 914 416 5343

American philosopher William James invokes causal indeterminism in favor of free will.

(1) Explain in your own words, the problem of free will and determinism. Recall from Chapter 1 that philosophical problems are generally characterized by seemingly strong support for mutually inconsistent views.

(2) What is causal indeterminism? American philosopher William James invokes causal indeterminism in favor of free will. Explain why you think James takes this stance.

(3) Fatalism (fate) and causal determinism are not the same, although the two are often confused. Explain why you think this happens. (In fact, some common arguments against determinism are really objections to fatalism.) Is there any evidence in favor of fatalism?

(4) Hard determinism accepts that (1), every event has a sufficient cause, and (2), if every event has a sufficient cause, then there is no free will.

What is the name for the position described by one (1)? What is the name for the position described by (2)?
[Hint: Your answers for the above question should be from the following list–indeterminism, determinism, compatibilism, incompatibilism. ]
What logically follows from (1) and (2)? That is, if you accept both 1 and 2, what follows?
[Hint: A similar question. What follows from (1) Every mammal has warm blood. (2) If every mammal has warm bloom, then there are no cold-blooded mammals? Simple: There are no cold-blooded mammals.
(5) Are you a determinist or indeterminst? Why or why not?

3B /Free Will: Is Free Will Compatible with Determinism?
Course Text: Doing Philosophy
Chapter 3, ”Free Will and Determinism”
Section 3.2, “The Mother of Invention: Freedom as Necessity”
This section introduces the concepts of traditional and hierarchical compatibilism.
Respond to each item below in 2- to 3-paragraphs. USE ONLY THE TEXTBOOK AND YOUR OWN MIND. USING OUTSIDE RESOURCES WILL RESULT IN FAILURE OF THE ASSIGNMENT. USE YOUR OWN WORDS. Please repeat and number each question. Put your 2-3 paragraph answer below each question.

(1) Both libertarians and traditional compatibilists hold that free will and moral responsibility require the ability to do other than you do. Libertarians hold that given an identical past, a person has several options, and can choose among them. This is captured by the idea of forking paths. Traditional compatibilists, being determinists, believe the world only has one possible future. How, then, do traditional compatibilists understand the ability to do other than you do? Your explanation should make clear how their analysis is compatible with determinism.

(2) According to traditional compatibilists, what two conditions must be met in order to count an action as free?

(3) What is Taylor’s ingenious physiologist Thought Experiment? What is Taylor’s drug addiction Thought Experiment? How do these two Thought Experiments undermine traditional compatibilism?

(4) What is Frankfurt’s decision inducer Thought Experiment? How does it attempt to show that moral responsibility does not require the ability to do otherwise? This belief is characteristic of hierarchical compatibilists. Recall that both libertarians and traditional compatibilists held that moral responsibility does require the ability to do otherwise, though they understood this ability differently.

(5) Which version of compatibilism do you find most plausible? Why?

(6) Are you a compatibilist or incompatibilist? That is, were you convinced by any version of compatibilism? Why or why not?