Philosophy Free Will Essay
Goodridge 1
Henry Goodridge
11/10/2014
Phil 1A
Professor Teuber
Some may think that a belief in determinism eliminates the possibility of free will, and even destroys the credibility of being held accountable for one’s actions. Within the context of the pizza and yogurt problem, this means that not only was eating pizza unavoidable, but that the repercussions of the event should not be placed on the shoulders of the diner. On the flip side, a libertarianist might argue that a vast pool of options exists whenever a problem is encountered, therefore meaning that any consequences of a chosen action are the fault of the decision maker. Going back to the pizza and yogurt example, the libertarianist could argue that the choice to eat the pizza was done with no interference other than the selection of the diner, meaning that the unhealthy results of the choice should befall them as well. At face value these two schools of thought seem to be entirely polarizing, meaning they cannot coincide in theory. By taking the fundamentals of each thought process, however, it can be made clear that no friction between the two ideas has to be created, they can be compatible.
Before examining how free will can exist in a deterministic world, it’s important to establish how determinism applies to the problem at hand. Choosing to eat pizza or yogurt may at first seem to be a tossup. A relatively small and trivial decision that could go either way with minimal persuasion, because it’s all dependent on my decision as the diner what I eat. Because of this, it may appear that my decision to eat pizza over yogurt was a close one.
There’s nothing really forcing me into either option, so I’m acting of my own accord and making a decision that had a decent chance of going either way, right? In reality, however, my decision to eat the pizza was essentially the only available option. In other words, If I went
Goodridge 2
back in time with no recollection of the
Henry Goodridge
11/10/2014
Phil 1A
Professor Teuber
Some may think that a belief in determinism eliminates the possibility of free will, and even destroys the credibility of being held accountable for one’s actions. Within the context of the pizza and yogurt problem, this means that not only was eating pizza unavoidable, but that the repercussions of the event should not be placed on the shoulders of the diner. On the flip side, a libertarianist might argue that a vast pool of options exists whenever a problem is encountered, therefore meaning that any consequences of a chosen action are the fault of the decision maker. Going back to the pizza and yogurt example, the libertarianist could argue that the choice to eat the pizza was done with no interference other than the selection of the diner, meaning that the unhealthy results of the choice should befall them as well. At face value these two schools of thought seem to be entirely polarizing, meaning they cannot coincide in theory. By taking the fundamentals of each thought process, however, it can be made clear that no friction between the two ideas has to be created, they can be compatible.
Before examining how free will can exist in a deterministic world, it’s important to establish how determinism applies to the problem at hand. Choosing to eat pizza or yogurt may at first seem to be a tossup. A relatively small and trivial decision that could go either way with minimal persuasion, because it’s all dependent on my decision as the diner what I eat. Because of this, it may appear that my decision to eat pizza over yogurt was a close one.
There’s nothing really forcing me into either option, so I’m acting of my own accord and making a decision that had a decent chance of going either way, right? In reality, however, my decision to eat the pizza was essentially the only available option. In other words, If I went
Goodridge 2
back in time with no recollection of the