Issues and debates: free will and determinism Flashcards
Describe free will
- full choice over actions
- no influence or manipulation from internal (genes) or external (peers) influences
Describe determinism
- behaviours are caused by something
- little actual control
- determinants are variables that cause our behaviour
Name 5 types of determinism
hard
soft
psychic
environmental
biological
Define hard determinism
Human behaviour is completely determined by factors outside of their control. I.e., we have no free will.
Define soft determinism
Human behaviour is generally predetermined by factors outside of their control, but have the option to exercise free will in some situations. Accepts humans have a perception of control.
Describe biological determinism
-Behaviour is the result of internal processes within the body.
-3 biological causes of behaviour:
- Genetics; Brain physiology; Biochemistry
- Genetics are very influential. Although though do not definitively cause behaviour, they can increase likelihood of that behaviour, disorder, syndrome or condition occurring.
-Detailed example, OCD
Describe environmental determinism
-Behaviour is the result of our physical environment.
- E.g., social influence.
- Milgram and Zimbardo - their ppts acted out of pressures from their environments. It could be argued they wouldn’t have normally acted like this, but their environment determined their behaviour.
Describe Psychic determinism
- Links very closely to the psychodynamic approach.
- Behaviour is caused by our unconscious mind.
- Freud - every behaviour has an initial cause and that behaviour was initiated in a part of our mind we cannot access.
- PD argues that this is why some individuals do not know why they take a certain course of action.
- Has roots in explaining criminality.
Evaluation point for free will and determinism: Scientific approach
Determinism in Psychology allows for a more scientific approach.
One of the goals of science is the establishment of general (nomothetic) laws, that allow scientists to make predictions and potentially control future events. Taking a deterministic approach literally does this, it seeks to isolate direct causes of behaviour, e.g., inherited predispositions, or learning via consequence. Hence, as we have determined the factors that drive behaviour.
This means that taking a deterministic view of human behaviour allows psychologists to be more confident in establishing cause and effect for any given behaviour.
Evaluation point for free will and determinism: Free will is an illusion
The behaviourist, Skinner, would argue that the concept of free will can be explained by determinism.
For example, if free will is the product of conscious thinking, and this can be explained by brain activity, then the ability to use ‘free will’ is determined by the internal factors of the connections in our brain.
This suggests… as Skinner (and Freud) suggested, free will is a convenient illusion.
Evaluation point for free will and determinism: Free will is a fallacy
There is evidence from the field of neuropsychology that suggests free will is, in fact, a fallacy.
For example, Chun Siong Soon et al. (2008) found that brain activity relating to whether to press a button with the left or right hand occurs in the brain up to 10 seconds BEFORE participants report being consciously aware of making such a decision.
This suggests that there are neurological processes occurring in the background that cause the decision we make, meaning our ‘free will’ choices could be the result of biological factors.
Evaluation point for free will and determinism: Practical dilemmas
Deterministic approaches create dilemmas and issues for the criminal justice system, as the law rarely accepts deterministic accounts of human behaviour as a legal defence.
For example, in the case of Stephen Mobley (1994) found guilty of shooting a pizza shop manager, the legal team’s request for genetic testing to see if he had inherited a ‘criminal gene’ (assumed on the basis that he had a family history of violent crime) was thrown out by the court.
This suggests that the law and society promotes individual responsibility and hence, people use free will to determine their actions and can be held responsible and accountable for crimes.
Evaluation point for free will and determinism: Free will is needed
Even if free will is an illusion, research suggests that it is desirable for humans to believe we have at least some degree of control over our lives and our decisions.
For instance, research has found that individuals with a high internal locus of control (so believe they have some degree of free will) tend to be mentally healthier. Roberts et al. (2000) found adolescents with a strong belief in fatalism (that their lives were determined by factors outside their control) were at significantly greater risk of depression.
This implies that the belief in free will is essentially for a good quality of life, otherwise people would feel helpless and demoralised.
Evaluation point for free will and determinism: Diathesis-stress
The diathesis stress approach can be seen as a more holistic alternative account that incorporates several types of determinism.
For instance, in patients with schizophrenia, the diathesis-stress account assumes that they had a vulnerability to developing the condition (diathesis) such as a genetic predisposition caused by a faulty variant C4 gene leading to hyper-pruning in the brain. Saying this is the sole cause could be regarded as biological determinism. However, the model then explains how other factors (stressors) are also needed for the predisposition to be triggered, such as having a schizophrenogenic mother (environmental determinism).
This implies that, although deterministic, the explanations are at least less reductionist, increasing their explanatory power.
Evaluation point for free will and determinism: Interactionism
An interactionist perspective may offer the best compromise in the debate, with some approaches including aspects of both determinism and free will.
The cognitive explanation of phobias suggests they are due to faulty thinking (a deterministic view). However, cognitive therapies encourage individuals to use their own free will to change their behaviour.
Similarly, approaches in psychology that have a cognitive element (like SLT), tend to adopt an interactionist or soft determinism perspective. For example, Bandura argues that environmental factors are key to learning behaviour, but that we are free to choose (or make decisions about) who or what to attend to and when to perform certain behaviours (think ARRM!).
This perspective offers perhaps the most complete explanation of many behaviours.
