Psychological Issues of Free Will - Essay Example

Has psychology eroded the grounds for believing in free will Believing in free will enables us to distinguish between rights and wrong naturally and psychology in the light of various perspectives and theories has no doubt affected free will of today's human beings, where man no longer believes in his own self. This notion agrees that psychology is responsible for alleviating the grounds of free will. On the other hand, it is assumed that one single free action is the result of another action which possesses some consequences and situations. This notion negates that psychology has a hand in eroding the grounds for believing in free will. One theory which denies human nature on one hand might accept to go accordingly in a common psychological perspective. This means psychological theories often contradict one another and are still accepted by psychologists while applying to various approaches, and despite giving a solution, are subjected to our mental reconcilement. Now, to what extent it has affected, we would discuss in this essay in the light of various psychological perspectives. If we talk about general psychology, we would see that psychology itself upholds combination of variety of approaches, theories and traditions. For example if we perceive psychology as a science, it would present us with a variety of covering three different scientific territories. First territory is that of social science that tells us how the human psyche is grounded in the social surroundings of language, norms and identity. The second territory associates psychology with natural sciences which analyses how psyche is related to neurophysics and biology while the third territory determines how psyche is extended into the domains of humanity with cultural traditions (Bertelsen, 2003, p. 24). Free will as High-level Psyche Looking at free will from the perspective of an individuated high-level psyche, would allow us to consider the notion that free will cannot be achieved until and unless driven by some internal or external compulsion. For example a man who commits robbery is subjected to the threat of being caught and punished from the legal and judicial point of view, whereas morally he is also subjected to a misdeed. That means he is responsible for the crime he has committed which otherwise he had not been. This indicates he possessed free will as long as he disobeyed law and order. In order to follow or believe the significance of free will it is necessary to be free from external or internal compulsion, which indicates being free from psychological concerns and motives. Whether we are pessimistic or optimistic, psychology has made us highly restrictive about the types of action that can be directly free, the contexts in which directly free actions can be performed, and the frequency with which we might act with direct freedom. According to Pereboom (2001) "We choose according to various physical events that goes on in the brain, and these events are governed by physical laws" (Pereboom, 2001, p. 38). Therefore psychology administers those laws that escort us, thereby depriving us of free will. To what extent free will is compatible with Psychology Free-will is often contrasted with determinism where classical determinism suggests that whatever happens in any situation is due to the laws pertaining to that situation. Determinism versus free-will allows three different positions: 1) Psychology and free will are not compatible for the reason that scientific explanations are based upon determinism principles. 2) Psychology and free will are not compatible but since free will belongs to the unproven part of the scientific explanation, it is called 'libertarianism'. 3) Psychology is compatible with free will and can be scientifically justified. Believing in free will through analysing Libertarianism Since libertarianism does not allow psychology to be compared with free will, it denies psychology. Therefore it is this part that we analyse how psychology erodes free will. While making decisions, we are often bound to actively participate and intentionally form intentions to perform actions of certain sorts, we carry out these intentions. These intentions let us take act unintentionally without any prior decision so to act. If really we have free will, there is no need to be dependant upon situations, giving reasons and explanations to our conscience for every deed and misdeed. If we suppose for a while that we use our free will and act as free agents, how is it that we are bound by our fortunes and circumstances Even for some of our actions, we contribute in important ways to become the individuals that we are, with the characteristics, good and bad, that we have (Clarke, 2003, p. 4). We are, we think, engaged in a type of self-creation. And it is good, we typically hold, to be, to some extent at least, free self-creators. The dignity that one possess and enjoy being a free agent, then, consists in one's making a difference, by one's exercises of active control, to how things go in the world. The act of free will if adopted consists in one's actions', consequences that being attributable to one as their source and author, provide that one has an ordinary capacity to appreciate and act for moral reasons, in one's being responsible for one's actions and their consequences. Psychology - Medium of exploiting our free will It would not be wrong to say that psychology has bounded us into limitations that have eroded our determinism and will of making decisions. We have lost our decision making power for fulfilling various rules that psychology has made for us. As a libertarian, our free will is far from over, and those who believe a libertarian free will is not intelligible, the culprit is psychology. If somehow we believe that free will implies ultimate responsibility and underived origination, then it requires that some free actions must be undetermined and must be capable of occurring or not occurring the laws of nature (Kane, 1996, p. 106). By the assumption that psychology acts as a tool that not allow us to believe in free will, we let our behaviour not to be perceived as the result of a person's own choosing, because people have no control over either the heredity with which they are born or that particular environment in which they developed and now find themselves. In fact many of us typically think that they are controlling their environments, but this view holds that in reality their presumably controlling behaviour has been, itself entirely controlled, therefore it is an inevitable result of their heredity, present environment, and total learning experience (Harcum, 1994, p. 5). According to this view, we can say that people are more psychology dependant than determinism or free will and are powerless to change themselves, regardless of their own wishes, because even such wishes have been programmed by factors external to their selves. How psychology has subjugated our vision to believe in free will Psychology has created examples before us that elaborate on not believing in free will but human psyche. The best example is that of multiple-role relationships where psychology alleviates the determining power of the individual and he or she starts involving in multiple-role relationships where he or she participates simultaneously or sequentially in two or more relationships with another person. This gives rise to the harmful consequences and the person adopting multiple-role relationships is subjected to substantial differences or conflicts between the two roles. As this definition suggests, multiple-role relationships do not necessarily involve a professional person and a client, student, or research participant, it can and do happen in everyday life (Kitchener, 2000, p. 111). This way when psychology distracts free will, it utilises the opportunity to meet human psyche when they occur in professional practice, this way the individual gets deprived of free will to decide on his own and become ethically troublesome for psychologists as well as for the society. Therefore in order to bring the disturbed individual back on the track, the psychologist or the counsellor is bound to adopt many roles. According to Sonne (1994) "Multiple-role relationships in psychology covers all those psychologists who are aware of playing two or more professional roles as well as those in which the psychologist is involved in another non-professional definitive and intended role" (Sonne, 1994). Psychology have made many decision-making models and rules (Gutheil & Gabbard, 1993) to help mental health professionals think through the potential consequence of crossing boundaries. This is it because psychology itself has contributed in many ways to alleviate free will and deterministic characters of the society. There are other psychic concerns created by psychology in order to formulate the therapeutic relationship, some have implications more broadly for other kinds of multiple-role relationships. For instance, Gottlieb suggested that three elements must be considered when evaluating the potential harmfulness of both therapeutic and non-therapeutic multiple relationships. These include the amount of power that the psychologist consumes in order to make the individual revive at least some of its free will, the duration of the relationship, and the clarity of the termination. Free will and the principle of making autonomous decisions is the centre point of many ethical decisions as well as many ethical disputes in psychology because there are some inherent tensions between psychological principles on one side and the principle of autonomy on the other (Engelhardt, 1986). However as far as autonomous decision making, Engelhardt suggested that applications of the principles of psychology are more likely to be justified in terms of their teleology or consequences. Another aspect through which psychology has affected our free will is by using 'Justice' which usually concerns the conflicts of interest over limited goods and services and because human benevolence is limited. Justice has created boundaries around the people by developing rules and procedures for adjudicating claims in a so called 'fair' manner. It is through using this 'tool' that various psychological interventions have been developed which has made this generation limited and dependant on one hand while letting the culprit free on the other. It is under the umbrella of psychological shelter that a culprit feels safe and secure. With such Psychological advancement man has started relying upon therapies which has reduced his confidence level because confidence comes with free will and since there is little believe in free will left, therefore every aspect of human life has become psyche dependant. Almost three centuries ago man was declared free by scholars like Thomas Hobbes (Phemister, 2001). Today it is through the 'blessing' of psychology that man is more oriented towards adopting unethical means of expressing his gratitude by lying, deception, and failure to be trustworthy rather than to simple utilising his conscience and free will power to prosper and rule. Therefore psychology has formulated for us serious consequences, that now we have to consider before taking any measure, this has made our lives vulnerable and more dependant than it was some centuries ago. With the passage of time, psychological interventions are negating our morals for they destroy faith in the therapist, instructor, or supervisor to be helpful; they destroy faith in the mutuality of relationships in general; and they destroy faith in the benefits that psychology can offer to the public. References Bertelsen Preben, (2003) Free Will, Consciousness and the Self: Berghahn Books: New York. Clarke Randolph, (2003) Libertarian Accounts of Free Will: Oxford University Press: New York. Engelhardt H. T., Jr. (1986) The foundations of bioethics. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Gutheil T. G., & Gabbard G. O. (1993) "The concept of boundaries in clinical practice: Theoretical and risk-management dimensions" In: American Journal of Psychiatry, 150,188-196. Harcum E. Rae, (1994) A Psychology of Freedom and Dignity: The Last Train to Survival: Praeger Publishers: Westport, CT. Kane Robert, (1996) The Significance of Free Will: Oxford University Press: New York. Kitchener Karen Strohm, (2000) Foundations of Ethical Practice, Research and Teaching in Psychology: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ. Pereboom Derk, (2001) Living without Free Will: Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, England. Phemister A. Andrew, (2001) "Revisiting the Principles of Free Will and Determinism: Exploring Conceptions of Disability and Counseling Theory" In: The Journal of Rehabilitation. Volume: 67. Issue: 3. Sonne J. L. (1994) "Multiple relationships: Does the new Ethics Code answer the right questions" In: Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 25, 336-343. Read More