Free will, determinism, compatibilism - Essay Example

Since the dawn of mankind, theologians have questioned where humans are given free will or have been predestined. This question has puzzled some ofthe most scholars known throughout the history. What is more intriguing is the fact that even religions under the Abrahamic tradition have different viewpoints regarding this issue. While the Christian doctrine states that “All humans have sinned,” Islam has taken a different approach regarding this sensitive issue. Undoubtedly, life is full of challenges, surprises, and works in mysterious ways.

One cannot ignore the fact that certain circumstance that occur in life that one cannot control. Hence, the issue of fate and freewill become vital aspects in this discussion. Freewill and determinism is both true in their own distinct spheres. Freewill has been misidentified throughout history by the fact that freewill is not a mechanistic process. So what is freewill? Freewill is a perception that an individual possess the total control or ability to make decisions that will have an impact in their life.

In essence, free will insists that individuals control their destiny. Individuals that exercise free will have total conscious control over their decisions. Although external factors do play a vital role in certain scenarios; the decision ultimately rests upon the individual. Freewill is a meaningful theory that insists on unlimited experience of choice. Free will is a doctrine that refutes the idea of pre-destination. Freewill is a choice that individual possess that yields an outcome which is unknown.

The concept itself is very unique in a sense that it does take into account of external factors. One of the most prominent scholars that examined this issue very carefully was known as Al-Ghazzili. Al-Ghazzili takes a very logical approach towards this issue as he breaks the issue into two components, which consist of “predestination” and “fate.” He insists that human beings have never seen the past and can only anticipate the future, based on the “natural law.” Moreover, Imam Al-Ghazzili insists in his works that it is not incumbent upon God to do the best for humans; however, this does not mean that God will not in fact do the best of his own free will.

As mentioned above, the theory of free will does hold certain substance. However, there are many ambiguities and misconceptions that are contained in this theory. For instance, who chooses freewill? Furthermore, what kind of factors dictates this choice? The problem of free will can be distinguished from the traditional approach of agency. In essence, the actions that humans and animals take themselves are to modify their determinism. The traditional core root of the problem is the fact that in a deterministic world, several things tend to happen in a natural, divine law.

Individuals can only change certain conditions as certain things do happen in randomness is an enigma of life. Moreover, individuals may lack the awareness of critical thinking and logical which can deter them from making the right choices. Furthermore, the concept of free will seems to threaten the idea of reason itself. Reason, is no doubt since it requires casualty and determinism. Most scholars agree that refuting that agency does not exist in our system is a huge obstacle for reason. Science itself relies in indeterminism as shown in the methodology of the “Big Bang theory” itself.

The laws of nature would not be considered “laws” if they were strictly reliant on mathematics. Interestingly enough, the concept of probability even acknowledges the fact of randomness. In math itself, this becomes a huge flaw in an argument. Since laws of nature are dictated by statistics, how can one refute the fact that random events do not occur? This becomes a vital point in his argument because clearly chance is present in the universe. The idea of determinism is as critical because it breaks the link of determinism.

Hence, as “actors”, we are not responsible for random acts because chance cannot directly impact our free will since chance does exist. One of the main flaws with freewill is that it makes it makes humans as actors in their fate. Choice requires action, so there has to be a need for an “actor.” However, not all individuals have the supreme ability to decide everything in life. An afghan kid has no control regarding those constant bombings that are taking in his community, clearly cannot control this particular factor.

The tradition that “he chose” that life is undoubtedly false since the child did not choose that particular lifestyle. Blauger again brilliantly depicts this as he uses this certain example. Suppose if Ball A and Ball B would be struck. Ball A extends to 12 meters while Ball B goes to around 12.5 meters. Clearly, if they are struck at the same power and energy, why is that Ball B extends more than Ball A? Blauger takes this example to elaborate on the notion of free will itself. In this particular context, he argues that human ability to control their actions is always based upon a merit.

Blauger argues on the notion that “first order desires” of human beings are impacted by human behavior. Works Cited Balaguer, Mark. Free will as an open scientific problem . Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2010. Print.