Determinism and Free Will - Essay Example

Determinism and Free Will Hondericch summarizes his writing by saying life-hope prevails because people have the capa to change the course of events that can happen in the future. There is hope because people must not be subject to the whims of circumstances nor even to their nature. While conditions and environment do highly influence the outcome of the future; still, man can alter the outcomes if he wants to do so. Although this life-hope image is closely associated with Free Will, Honderich himself believes that man can rise above nature and the environment.

The second argument against determinism is that people can always change their minds about a decision let’s say to do something or to go somewhere. The author calls this “stepping-back” which is an active participation of an individual to take decisions as well as change decisions in his life.

These decisions were based on values that the theory of determinism lacks according to Honderich. The last argument against determinism by Honderich is about determinism as “self-destructive”. He first stated the Epicurean argument of determinism to lay down a strong foundation for his reason. In the end, Honderich concluded that if determinism was true, then people do not have free will. Of course, we know that man has free will and would do whatever he chooses according to his value judgments.

The main difference tells us that Frankfurt believes that a person is still morally responsible for the consequences of his actions. Frankfurt believes that individuals have a choice to make and be answerable for their decisions. In the principle of alternative possibilities, coercion is an excuse for people not to do something that they should do. Frankfurt still considers the argument of alternative possibilities but weighs the conditions surrounding the actions of a person. The film minority report is related to Franklin’s moral responsibility article because the story convicts people who have not done anything yet.

The science fiction film tells us of a society where the future can be predicted by three mutants that can predict the future. In this case, people can get arrested for just thinking of a crime and not yet committing it. If such is the situation, then free will does not exist because the argument of stepping back would not be recognized by the police. Also, society would be very harsh to civilians because people have to be tried first before being imprisoned. Here, alternate possibilities are already explored through the use of multiple time paths.

As precogs recognize precrime, they pose an alternative solution: arrest the person so the crime would be prevented. In a way, Frankfurt accepts this proposition because he considers the principle of alternative possibilities false. He asserts that people must try their best to pursue a course of action with the best value possible. In case he deviates from the action due to coercion, Frankfurt does not accept that as an excuse at all. Perhaps, we can say that Frankfurt could have been the head of the bureau in the movie for his ideas set the theme for the film. Things cannot be changed and people are bound to their course of action.