Free will and moral responsibilty Flashcards
Incompatibilism
View that Determinism + Libertarianism are incompatible.
We are either free or determined
Hard determinism
Belief + desire + temperament = action
View that all events + situations, including human decagons + actions are the necessary consequence of previous events. (we are not free- external force)
Scientific determinism
Form of hard determinism that is based on evidence from natural + applied sciences
Psychological behaviourism
View that human behaviour is caused predominantly by environmental conditions + that all actions are conditioned by previous ones.
What is free will?
-Hume defines free will; “ A power of acting or not acting, according to determination of the will” 1748 sect viii
-The power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one’s own discretion.
-UK law has 3 levels of legal responsibility to recognise complexity of sentencing;
no responsibility
Diminished responsibility
Full responsibilty
Sam Harris
- He is an atheist + determinist
- Similar concept with Freud.
- Claims that thought is conditioned, “we are just conscious witness’ of our minds.” (Bystander)
Sam Harris quote
- ” Free will is an illusion… we exert no conscious control” From one of his talks
- Reason that’s its an illusion: mental lives gives us sense of freedom.
- We don’t control brain events, + brain events gives us rise to mental events (simply biology of the brain.)
What’s his analogy?
- Choosing a city
- it is motivated by experience + freedom, so there is no space for freedom, + no actual free decision.
- Reason is consciousness;
we have mental lives so we feel free- however we cant be free if brain events that makes us aware yet we have no control over them. Thus, just biology of the brain.
Proof of determinism
- Benjamin
monitored electrical impulse, people looking at a screen can see mental decision before the person know their self.
Example : 2 boys
Jon Venables + Robert Thompson
(relate to Sam Harris)
- 2 10 year old boys from Merseyside tortured + murdered 2 year old James Bulger.
- Both came from dysfunctional families.
-E.g: Both had fathers who had left + uncapable mothers
Thompsons mum was known as an incompetent adult.
Conclusion
-Extreme case: cant deny their background had some part to play - EG: In less extreme cases we make excuses -“he’s not moody, he’s depressed. His relationship just ended”
- We make casual links for peoples behaviours’. We aren’t prepared to “excuse” everything
Who was Spinoza?
- Continental rationalist(School of thought) on epistemology (How we know stuff)
- Believes feeling of freedom was ignorance
- Inspired Einstein
Who was Spinoza?
Determinism
- Continental rationalist(School of thought) on epistemology (How we know stuff)
- Believes feeling of freedom was ignorance
- Inspired Einstein
- Built his idea on the rationalist theory of Descartes.
- Not an atheist, brought up in a Jewish environment
Define event causation
No physical event can occur without having been caused by a previous physical event.
Define agent causation
An agent - A being propelled by a mind- can start a whole chain of causality that wasn’t caused by anything else.
What is Spinozas argument?
Substance monism
Spinoza claims that we interpret God anthropomorphically.
1- Claimed that one (1) infinitive substance- God or nature (totality of existence- the more we understand the world around us the more we know God) - is the only substance that exists.
(There is only 1 true substance)
2- Claimed that God is a projection of the imagination, humans have portrayed God with human attributes (anthropomorphism). God isn’t supernatural or transcendent. (our view of God fails eg:Torah)
- Used the analogy of a triangle, to support human claim. As if a triangle could talk it would obviously claim God = triangle.
Thus freedom is from knowledge + Happiness is aligning our will with universe. God causes everything.
Evidence of spinoza
- ” If a triangle could speak, it would say… that God is eminently triangular”
- ” In the mind there is no absolute, or free, will”
Example to use with spinoza:
Consult therapist/ analyst; they pick out unconscious causes of actions which we were naturally unaware. EG: past trauma long forgotten. - A boy has had trouble trusting people in fear of abandonment ever since his mother left him at a young age. (people are unaware of causes but doesn’t mean the causes aren’t the reason for them acting a certain way)
Who was Oedipus?
- Prophecy was to kill his father + marry his mother.
-Father gave him away, because of this. - He left his adopted family + ended up fulfilling prophecy.
Conclusion : There is no escaping fate.
Avoiding Scientific determinism
1) Scientific determinism can be avoided if the laws of nature are probabilistic. EG: Geocentric solar system believed for many years, now its heliocentric.
2) S.D can be avoided if the quantum world is undetermined. In the “Copenhagen interpretation” Bohr + Werner, governing laws of the quantum world which are undetermined + probabilistic. Eg: There is no evidence for the fundamental particle “Quark”
Epicurus
- Libertarianism
- “epicurean philosophy”
- 1st to come up with the inconsistent triad.
- we feel free so are therefore free
- everything in physical world seems determined
Epicurus argument
-Evidence + science tend towards determinism; personal + moral experience tend towards free-will.
B.f Skinner
Theory of radical/psychological behaviourism
- Influenced by Freud
- If psychology is to be a science, don’t study the mind, Study behaviour (observatory evidence)
- Behaviour is a result of genetic + environmental conditions. (All human actions conditioned by right or wrong).
- Determinism is “complete”, denies free will
EG; If action = good consequence, brain becomes disposed to repeat it. If bad= avoid action.
Investigations associated with Skinner
Pavlovs dog
Concluded; Can introduce another stimulus, bell, (symbol, evidence of external forces) to give the same response that food gave.
“little albert experiment” (conditioning)
- Better example, as application to humans
-concluded: Phobia of a rabbit from steal rod hitting bell every time rabbit was near. Stimulus removed + fear remained.
“The instant the rat was shown, the baby began to cry” Watson + Rayner
Conclude; the way we behave os from how we are conditioned (learned behaviour)
Positive reinforcement
- hungry rat in his Skinner box
- When rat knocked lever food would drop.
- They learned to go straight to food
-P.R = strengthens behaviour by providing a consequence that the person finds rewarding
Negative reinforcement
- Removal of unpleasant reinforcer can strengthen behaviour
- Eg: don’t do hw, give teacher £5, avoid paying by doing hw.
-Rats avoid electric current (introduced) by turning light on in box, before electric current came on. Pressed lever when light came on, to stop electric current.
Punishment (weakens behaviour)
- Punishment = opposite of reinforcement, weakens a response.
1- Punished behaviour = not forgotten, it’s suppressed, returns when punishment is removed.
2- increased aggression- way of coping
Noam Chomsky
Theory; the innate theory
- American philosopher + cognitive scientist
- Dismissed Skinner’s proposal as speculation + assumption.
Chomsky criticism’s
Argues behaviour is innate (Born with: not influenced by environment)
Critics to Skinner
1) Unsound to compare animal behaviour to complexity of humans- issue of extrapolation.
2) Our behaviour thesis is merely an example of a conditional response, so why listen? This is if our behaviour is a set of conditional responses determined by genetics + environment.
-Psychological determinism collapsed in early 60’s for internal reasons (experiments)
Experiment ;
Pig- Conditioned to put a coin in a mail slot, reinforced by food. After time (instinctual drift occurred) pig began rooting. Then experiment was terminated
Conclude; animals being reinforced when they are aware of what’s happening, thus it’s just information transmission (estimation)
- If an animal acts this way than we will (humans = more complex) even animals aren’t getting conditioned response.
-We have restricted freedom as conditioning = faulty.
Chomsky
Approach to language Aquisation
Ironically; Chomsky’s theory based on no test subject (animal or human)
- Direct link to babies learning is the parents
-Argued a child was naturally predisposed to learn a language.
E.G;
Feral children- Kamala + Amal’s, 2 Indiana girls raised by wolves - Adopted by missionaries, attempt to rehabilitate them.
-Amal’s died shortly died after being found, Kamala vocab was 40 words
Gesell
Suports skinner this example: 3 year old grasped 12 words, they are usually really chatty.
Free will; compatabilism
David Hume
- View; human freedom + moral responsibility are compatible with determinism
- We have “liberty of spontaneity” rather than “liberty of indifference”
- “liberty of indifference” = freedom from necessity Hume saw as delusion.
- “Liberty of spontaneity” liberty consistent with with necessity + ability to do what you desire.
- Space for humans to act on desires, but always influences. (Paralysis of freedom)
- Thinks determinists have been too harsh; always see events side by side.
Compatabalism;
-A01
- Hume is concerned with semantics (logic concerned with meaning)
-Believes much confusion about issue since philosophers not defined their terms
-Thus, he begins by giving own definition of “necessity”
-Necessity from causal determinism = not logical necessity.
Logical necessity kind we find in maths EG: 2+2=4 logically true. Humans = habit assuming laws of nature have this necessity, but we see nature in “constant conjunction”
+ (learn) Human nature works in the same way. We expect see same behaviour from people but isn’t logically necessary.
