Opinion on Philosophical Theories - Essay Example

Free Will and Determinism versus Existentialism Free will and determinism are essential components of existentialism. Most of the issues people think about are not out of free will. The things are done for the purpose because function is a component of free will. People engage in thoughts because they have a motive, but there must be the will to conform to reality that purposes happen because there is a choice that is made. Motive aligns with determinist belief that every event has a particular cause.

However, people cannot shape their destinies without outside influence as proposed by existentialists. Free will is the driving force to life that persuades a person to take a course of action and responsibility afterwards. There are constraints that limit the existence of freedom, so people do not have an exclusive advantage to exercise free will and determinism (Christian, 2008). Free will requires control though there are some things that cannot be controlled. Free will helps people to achieve desires by controlling their target environment at any given time.

The people must be aware of the realties that exist in that environment in order for them to exercise free will and control. The responsibility that comes after exercise free will is used to measure the amount of control that has been achieved. It dictates the extent a person has exercised control. Responsibility and control define free will and determinism, but they are done with consciousness featured in existentialism as proposed by Jean Paul Sartre. Classical Laissez Faire versus LiberalismMajority of people in the society do not interfere with private actions of certain people because of their positions in the government in fear confrontation by the rule of the law.

The will of an individual should not be ignored in favor of general will, but it should not be a determinant factor for implementing particular actions. The will of a person to keep his or her private affairs from the public domain does not subdue them to any rule of the law. Liberalism is meant to protect any person from tyrannical requirement based on provisions of the constitution as long as the affairs do not interfere with the interests of the public. A person is free to pursue their private affairs according to Classical Laissez Faire and limit the government or the power of the majority from any forced imposition (Christian, 2008).

Therefore, Laissez Faire promotes legal transactions while liberalism gives them knowledge to and power to protect themselves from the whims of the social tyranny pros. However, there are times when a person’s private actions are justifiable without being harmful to anyone has the right to offer an opinion to change his or her intentions. Offering an opinion is right but the law cannot be applied to modify the beliefs or behaviors of that person. The doctrine of liberalism protects pro-classical laissez faire when their actions do not interfere with any regulations.

However, people have the right to protect the society from any form of injury, and the government intervention should be pursued to help improve the living conditions in the society. Individuals have the right to take or deny the improvements suggested. Reference Christian, J. (2008). Philosophy, an introduction to the art of wondering (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.