Our Freedom To Make Ethical Choices Is Only An Apparent Freedom 
‘Our freedom to make ethical choices is only an apparent freedom’
Determinism- implies that human beings have no free will and cannot be held morally responsible for their actions
Accepting that we are not free- our behaviour is the product of forces over which we have no control. (USE EXAMPLE FROM JAMES RACHELS)
Our capacity to experience emotions/ compassion does NOT depend on free will
We will have reason for our actions, even if we lack free will. We would still have the same goals, but viewing them as ‘our goals’ would slightly change- instead we would view them as products of our make up, our brains and the influence of our enviroments.
Fatallistic attitude – why give to charity when the children are going to be sick anyway? You not giving to charity means they are going to be worse off.
Our actions would be rational, even if it was not free- it would be rational and deliberately aimed at the outcome we wanted.
Even without free will, we will still be generous, brave,cowardly,kind or cruel. We just have more of an understanding to why people are bad- less judgemental. however all other events that occur in the world are effects of “ordinary causal sequences” our decisions and following actions are effects of causes (causal sequences) also
“If this is so, we surely have good reason, a strong inferential base, for taking the same to be true of the decisions and actions”
Ted Honderich
EXAMPLE: a clever scientist presses the button of “Bob’s” mind machine causing him to decide to go for a walk
He may think it was him that chose to go for a walk
They are clearly not his decisions
EG 2: scientist only influences “Mary’s “ thoughts
She is unaware that these ideas were not her own
He continues to introduce these ideas into her mind which she may never had entertained – such as watching EastEnders
Can you say that these ideas are really hers?
AGAINST
James Rachels – our freedom, they say, is essential to our dignity as moral beings. It seperates us from animals.
Determinism- implies that human beings have no free will and cannot be held morally responsible for their actions
Accepting that we are not free- our behaviour is the product of forces over which we have no control. (USE EXAMPLE FROM JAMES RACHELS)
Our capacity to experience emotions/ compassion does NOT depend on free will
We will have reason for our actions, even if we lack free will. We would still have the same goals, but viewing them as ‘our goals’ would slightly change- instead we would view them as products of our make up, our brains and the influence of our enviroments.
Fatallistic attitude – why give to charity when the children are going to be sick anyway? You not giving to charity means they are going to be worse off.
Our actions would be rational, even if it was not free- it would be rational and deliberately aimed at the outcome we wanted.
Even without free will, we will still be generous, brave,cowardly,kind or cruel. We just have more of an understanding to why people are bad- less judgemental. however all other events that occur in the world are effects of “ordinary causal sequences” our decisions and following actions are effects of causes (causal sequences) also
“If this is so, we surely have good reason, a strong inferential base, for taking the same to be true of the decisions and actions”
Ted Honderich
EXAMPLE: a clever scientist presses the button of “Bob’s” mind machine causing him to decide to go for a walk
He may think it was him that chose to go for a walk
They are clearly not his decisions
EG 2: scientist only influences “Mary’s “ thoughts
She is unaware that these ideas were not her own
He continues to introduce these ideas into her mind which she may never had entertained – such as watching EastEnders
Can you say that these ideas are really hers?
AGAINST
James Rachels – our freedom, they say, is essential to our dignity as moral beings. It seperates us from animals.