Are Humans Free?
Reading #40 – d’Holbach: Humans are Determined
Are Humans Free? Key Points i. “Determinism” – all events are the results of antecedent conditions, and necessarily follow from these conditions ii. All events can be explained in terms of natural laws iii. Regarding human things: all of our “decisions” and “actions” are actually the result of prior causes – while our character and actions are entirely the result of factors beyond our control iv. Determinism entails that people cannot help but do what they do, and therefore cannot truly be said to “deserve” praise of blame – the proper punishment is therefore not retribution, but deterrence and correction v. Freedom – absence of both external and internal constraints [we invoke the term ‘free’ when we cannot determine the cause(s) that determines our will vi. Conclusion: Human beings are entirely determined by “nature”, i.e. by factors outside their control To Study [Questions] 1. How does Holbach describe a person’s life on earth?
2.
3.
4.
5.
Holbach describes a man’s life on earth as a line that nature commands and has power over; he is “born without his own consent” and his ideas come to him involuntarily – yet despite this, he is supposed to be a free agent who determines his own will and regulates his own condition. Why does society reject the idea that all of the actions of humans are necessary? Society has become accustomed to the idea that humans [man] are the only species that possess independence of other causes. What is the relation between the brain and the will? The will is a ‘modification’ of the brain, and is determined by the qualities [good or bad] of the object or the motive that is presented. Man acts accordingly to the impulse he received from this object or motive, or from the idea which has modified his brain – therefore disposing his will. When this does not happen, it is because man has been introduced to a new motive or idea which modifies his brain and gives him a new impulse – determining his will. Through all of this he is acting in accordance with the necessary laws from which he cannot emancipate himself. What have been the errors of philosophers on the free agency of man? What are the sources of actions of humans? According to d’Holbach, the errors of philosophers on the free agency of man have been that they have not examined the causes, independent of a person, that give motion to will itself. In Holbach’s opinion, will is determined by our surroundings and influence the decisions we make. Holbach also argues that conservation is a major source of action for humans, and that we make decisions based on the conservation of our own lives. Why is a person not free even when there is an absence of obstances? According to d’Holbach, a person is not free even when there is an absence of obstacles because man is ‘guided’ through life by the advantages he attaches to particular objects
and ideas which arouse his passions/increase happiness, which consequently rely on temperament – which depends on the physical laws and elements around him. 6. Does not acting against ones inclinations show that a person is free? Choice does not prove freedom – the very desire of displaying a certain quality becomes a necessary motive, therefore deciding his will for one action or another. What deludes man from thinking he is a free agent is his inability to discern the true motive which sets him in action. [suicide example] – to be free would be to act without any motive at all. 7. What renders it extremely difficult for a person to recur to the true principles of one’s own peculiar actions? It is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for a person to seek out the true principles of their own actions because our motives and ideas are so relative and remote in their causes of motivation that we cannot fathom the depths of it. Free agency among man is impossible because of this reason, and is considered to be an ignorant theory. In Conclusion – - We are born without our own consent; our likes and dislikes are produced from external sources - The will is nothing more than a ‘modification’ of the brain - We always act accordingly to our strongest desire, and one desire may be replaced by another just as long as the one that is replaced is NOT the strongest of the two… the desire that ‘wins’ is, by definition, the strongest one - The simple fact that we deliberate things does not prove that we have free will - It is absurd to insist that we are free – to be free would be to act from no motive at all, and THAT is impossible - If you persist in saying that you are free, that you move or do things without cause; it simply means you are ignorant of the cause of your motion or action Advocate of free will: It is apparent that our actions spring from our will, and we are therefore free. Determinist response: “Will” is not in fact the origin of our actions. FW: It can be demonstrated that we choose, which in turn demonstrates that we have freedom. D: Choice does not prove freedom.
FW: We are able to resist our desires, if we reflect on their consequences. D: We cannot resist our desires, but are caused to have them, and to act upon them, by our temperament and the influence of our society. FW: People act against their inclinations, which proves that they are not determined by their inclinations. D: People act contrary to a given inclination only because they are caused to act by a stronger
inclination. FW: Free agency is equivalent to the successful use of our powers to achieve our ends. This occurs whenever external impediments do not prevent us from exercising our powers in order to achieve our ends. D: Absence of restraint is not absence of necessity. We do not control the presence or absence of external impediments, nor do we control our powers or our ends. Determinist Explanation:
We are inclined to believe in free will because the
combination of causes that determine us is so complex,
we cannot understand it.
Are Humans Free? Key Points i. “Determinism” – all events are the results of antecedent conditions, and necessarily follow from these conditions ii. All events can be explained in terms of natural laws iii. Regarding human things: all of our “decisions” and “actions” are actually the result of prior causes – while our character and actions are entirely the result of factors beyond our control iv. Determinism entails that people cannot help but do what they do, and therefore cannot truly be said to “deserve” praise of blame – the proper punishment is therefore not retribution, but deterrence and correction v. Freedom – absence of both external and internal constraints [we invoke the term ‘free’ when we cannot determine the cause(s) that determines our will vi. Conclusion: Human beings are entirely determined by “nature”, i.e. by factors outside their control To Study [Questions] 1. How does Holbach describe a person’s life on earth?
2.
3.
4.
5.
Holbach describes a man’s life on earth as a line that nature commands and has power over; he is “born without his own consent” and his ideas come to him involuntarily – yet despite this, he is supposed to be a free agent who determines his own will and regulates his own condition. Why does society reject the idea that all of the actions of humans are necessary? Society has become accustomed to the idea that humans [man] are the only species that possess independence of other causes. What is the relation between the brain and the will? The will is a ‘modification’ of the brain, and is determined by the qualities [good or bad] of the object or the motive that is presented. Man acts accordingly to the impulse he received from this object or motive, or from the idea which has modified his brain – therefore disposing his will. When this does not happen, it is because man has been introduced to a new motive or idea which modifies his brain and gives him a new impulse – determining his will. Through all of this he is acting in accordance with the necessary laws from which he cannot emancipate himself. What have been the errors of philosophers on the free agency of man? What are the sources of actions of humans? According to d’Holbach, the errors of philosophers on the free agency of man have been that they have not examined the causes, independent of a person, that give motion to will itself. In Holbach’s opinion, will is determined by our surroundings and influence the decisions we make. Holbach also argues that conservation is a major source of action for humans, and that we make decisions based on the conservation of our own lives. Why is a person not free even when there is an absence of obstances? According to d’Holbach, a person is not free even when there is an absence of obstacles because man is ‘guided’ through life by the advantages he attaches to particular objects
and ideas which arouse his passions/increase happiness, which consequently rely on temperament – which depends on the physical laws and elements around him. 6. Does not acting against ones inclinations show that a person is free? Choice does not prove freedom – the very desire of displaying a certain quality becomes a necessary motive, therefore deciding his will for one action or another. What deludes man from thinking he is a free agent is his inability to discern the true motive which sets him in action. [suicide example] – to be free would be to act without any motive at all. 7. What renders it extremely difficult for a person to recur to the true principles of one’s own peculiar actions? It is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for a person to seek out the true principles of their own actions because our motives and ideas are so relative and remote in their causes of motivation that we cannot fathom the depths of it. Free agency among man is impossible because of this reason, and is considered to be an ignorant theory. In Conclusion – - We are born without our own consent; our likes and dislikes are produced from external sources - The will is nothing more than a ‘modification’ of the brain - We always act accordingly to our strongest desire, and one desire may be replaced by another just as long as the one that is replaced is NOT the strongest of the two… the desire that ‘wins’ is, by definition, the strongest one - The simple fact that we deliberate things does not prove that we have free will - It is absurd to insist that we are free – to be free would be to act from no motive at all, and THAT is impossible - If you persist in saying that you are free, that you move or do things without cause; it simply means you are ignorant of the cause of your motion or action Advocate of free will: It is apparent that our actions spring from our will, and we are therefore free. Determinist response: “Will” is not in fact the origin of our actions. FW: It can be demonstrated that we choose, which in turn demonstrates that we have freedom. D: Choice does not prove freedom.
FW: We are able to resist our desires, if we reflect on their consequences. D: We cannot resist our desires, but are caused to have them, and to act upon them, by our temperament and the influence of our society. FW: People act against their inclinations, which proves that they are not determined by their inclinations. D: People act contrary to a given inclination only because they are caused to act by a stronger
inclination. FW: Free agency is equivalent to the successful use of our powers to achieve our ends. This occurs whenever external impediments do not prevent us from exercising our powers in order to achieve our ends. D: Absence of restraint is not absence of necessity. We do not control the presence or absence of external impediments, nor do we control our powers or our ends. Determinist Explanation:
We are inclined to believe in free will because the
combination of causes that determine us is so complex,
we cannot understand it.
