Internalism and Perceptions of Human Freedom - Essay Example

Watsons Internalism Introduction Internalism is philosophical argument that is based on Watson’s perceptions of human freedom. According to this philosophical concept, for a belief to be agreed upon or justified, then the subject involved in the scenario has to be having an access to the particular reasons that relate to the said belief. In such a condition, the subject’s reason has to be in access of the subject (Fischer&Mark 252). Moral philosophy of Internalism Internalism in the contemporary world when looked at in a philosophical manner entails that moral conviction which in most instances can be considered not to be beliefs on the feelings of approval or moral disapproval. These factors can be fundamentally motivating. Internalists from the motivational background have a belief that there exists an internal connection that is necessary to be put into consideration between an individual’s conviction that something has to be done and the motivation as well to the intended purpose which can be labeled as X (Fischer&Mark 252). Internalism in the ethical perspective This philosophical concept when looked at in an ethical manner, then an individual should have committed to their desires or the goals that they would like to achieve. When taking an example that Peter, a young boy would like to be involved in drug use as used by fellow students in class, Peter has the internal reason to take the drugs as he wants to feel what the rest of the students usually feels when they are taking such like drugs. For an internal’s, Peter has all the reasons as to why he would like to be involved in drug taking but in an ethical perspective view of the internalist, Peter knows that it is wrong to commit such like crimes and he ought not to be involved in taking drugs like the rest of the students indulging in such(Schaubroeck 26). Justification In the contemporary epistemology, internalism based on justification entails that there should be a justification for any action that is undertaken by any individual’s mind. A belief should highly be connected to the subject’s consciousness. Internalism can be distinguished in two sections. These include internalism based on knowledge and internalism that is based on justification and this should be distinguished well. Based on the judgment on justification, this is the most widely accepted form of internalism and is based on the conscious mind of an individual. Based on knowledge, conditions are distinguishable when established on beliefs and the knowledge that is upheld on a particular state of mind of an individual (Hawthorne 215). It is thus important to note that, internalism is can be based on the knowledge and justification approaches. Both of these concepts are meant to enable individuals to understand the internalism as a way of expressing freedom. It is true that an individual can be justified in believing that something is to be true and the same individual could also be having very little knowledge based on the same idea. Therefore, according to internalism, it is possible to justify an idea without involving any form of knowledge based on the facts about It (Smith 19). Criticisms of internalism based on externalism and determinism While internalism bases its concepts on consciousness of the mind being justified, externalism maintains on the idea that all the things that are in this world that motivate us and also justify the beliefs that we have are the same things that determines their meanings to human beings (Rowlands 137 ). When critically looking at the concept of stealing based on externalism, it is a more intelligent act not to be controlled by the desires that an individual may have at heart. For example, when looking at the instant that Peter has the desire to take drugs. An externalist philosopher would look first at what are the motivating factors for Peter to be involved in the same thing as taking drugs (Rowlands 137 ). Some of the motivational factors to could be the way they behave after taking the drugs. When looked critically at this situation, then for an externalist, it is important that Peter does not take the direction of being involved in drugs as there is nothing that can be justifying or giving motivation to bring the meaning of taking drugs. Externally, even if taking drugs is the most admired thing that students at his age usually do, it is not the right path that can be encouraged by any society (Mendola 27). In the line of justified beliefs based on internalism, externalism nullifies this concept. This can be based on the fact that, when an individual has a belief on something like the belief of God existing and yet there is no knowledge that can be used to accompany or justify this belief, then the whole concept should be declared null and void. It is only things that individuals have knowledge on that can be easily justified, therefore, it is not possible to justify any idea without having any tangible knowledge on it (Mendola 27). According to determinism, contrary to internalism, everything that happens in the present is usually as a result of what had occurred previously. This concept places its idea nature and the laws that encompass it. What takes place currently according to determinism was meant to happen and can never be controlled. Determinism entails the idea of being responsible for any actions that are based on morals. Individual’s actions are not to be a justified based on justification without knowledge but, the individual has to possess the right knowledge so that he or she knows what is morally correct or wrong (Salles 64). This way, all the actions that are carried out by an individual are to be morally right. It only requires that the individual knows how to differentiate what is morally right from what is morally wrong. Determinism therefore, to some extent is like externalism whereby, knowledge has to be taken into consideration unlike in internalism where justification can be done without determining if an idea is true or false (Salles 64). Determinism unlike internalism, responsibility does not give an option of doing otherwise but the correct thing is what can enable an individual to be considered responsible. For responsibility to be taken into consideration, then the right thing has to be done otherwise all becomes an un-responsible action. Thus, like for the case of Peter taking drugs through desire or motivational factors, it should be something that he already knows what to do. The first responsible action that he is to undertake is know that taking of drugs is not morally correct, hence he is not to be involved in taking of the drugs like other students due to desire or other motivational factors (Campbell 219). Justifying my position for Internalism Determinism and externalism seems to be supporting each other’s philosophical views. This is because, for both, there has to be knowledge involved for any action to be justified. It is important to understand fully on how internalism works. It is not only through justifying actions without knowledge that it bases its facts on freedom (Rainbolt 87). One of the major concepts that should be used against determinism and externalism is that, there has to be a desire for any particular action to take place. Desire is what in most instances drives any action. For example, in the case of Peter taking drugs or not, it is the desire of knowing how exactly it feels like when taking drugs. Peter does not have knowledge of how it feels when taking drugs. This is attributed to the fact that, Peter can only justify his position of desire of taking drugs but he has no knowledge on what could happen to him. He might have seen individuals behaving in a particular way, but the knowledge can only be instilled when he takes the drugs and feels what they really do to people (Smith 19). It is also important to note that, a belief on something can only be determined by the factors that are attributed to it in an internal environment. It is only the internal factors that can be used to determine the function of a particular idea. A subject has to have something that is internally related to his or her perceptions for drawing any conclusions into an idea. It is important that there is a particular desire first that comes from the subject before any form of action is undertaken (Fischer&Mark 253). Externalism is not just about leaving out the knowledge part that is required but is meant to bring out the notion that morals comes about as a result in varied desires. Therefore, desire has to be involved in this case too. For anything to be considered moral, then, the internal factors have to be put into consideration. The internal factors like the main perception of subject in relation to what he or she feels that is right is what can be used to base the morality factor (Fischer&Mark 254). It is only the perception of individuals that they have grown up with that can trigger moral issues in them. For example, if an individual grew up with the internal view of knowing that stealing is not a good act, then the only correct thing that this individual can do is to ensure that he or she does not steal. This is something that has not been forced onto him or her but it he or she must have grown up knowing that it is important never to be caught stealing. Stealing cannot be merged with the motivation as well. Motivation can only be linked to internal factors which are still highly upheld by internal factors (BonJour 203). Conclusion It is thus important to note that internalism is based on subject relating to the internal factors in order to carry out a particular action. It is through a desire that an individual is motivated about a particular idea and it is only through a desire that comes internally that enables individuals to distinguish the wrong from the right. Work cited Fischer, John M, and Mark Ravizza. Responsibility and Control: A Theory of Moral Responsibility. Cambridge [u.a.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2000. Print. Schaubroeck, . The Normativity of What We Care About. a Love-Based Theory of Practical Reasons. Leuven: Leuven UP, 2012. Print. Hawthorne, John. Ethics. Malden, MA: Wiley Periodicals, Inc, 2009. Print. Smith, Michael. Ethics and the a Priori: Selected Essays on Moral Psychology and Meta- Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Print. Salles, Ricardo. The Stoics on Determinism and Compatibilism. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate Pub, 2005. Print. Campbell, Joseph K. Freedom and Determinism. Cambridge, Mass. [u.a.: MIT Press, 2004. Print. Mendola, Joseph. Anti-externalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print. Rowlands, Mark. Externalism: Putting Mind and World Back Together Again. Chesham, Bucks: Acumen, 2003. Print. Rainbolt, George W. The Concept of Rights. Dordrecht: Springer, 2006. Internet resource.OBrien, Dan. An Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge. Cambridge: Polity, 2006. Print. BonJour, Laurence, and Ernest Sosa. Epistemic Justification: Internalism Vs. Externalism, Foundations Vs. Virtues. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub, 2003. Print. Read More