• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Asses the claim that humans are not free to make moral decisions

Extracts from this document...


´╗┐Assess the claim that human beings are not really free to make moral choices Whether or not humans are free to make moral decision or have ?free will? is one that has produced much controversy over the many years it has been debated. There are 3 main stances to this argument, those being ?Hard? Determinism, ?Weak? Determinism and Libertarianism, all of which will be discussed in the following essay. Strict determinists, such as Baron Holbach, perceive the idea of free will as an illusion due to the determined outcomes that could be predicted by the right knowledge of the causes that affect us however Libertarians such as Roderick Chisholm perceive our freedom as requiring a self, which intervenes in our decision-making. ...read more.


are able to go unpunished, which consequently would make the world in which we live an incredibly unsafe place. In my opinion I believe in the weak determinism theory that suggests some things of what we do is predetermined but we still do make choices. This is because a lot of what we do is determined on our up bringing our phenotype etc which produces a limited choice, but still a choice nonetheless. Hard Determinism is the belief that a determinate set of conditions can only produce one possible outcome given fixed laws of nature. ...read more.


For example we can say if someone is thirsty they will try to find a drink, but this is not always true, they may be fasting for example, there is no way of listing all the possible outcomes meaning that there is not just one possible outcome, even with something as basic as thirst. Another issue is that genes do not, on their own determine a unique effect, they only ever have an effect through interaction with the environment, for example, someone may have a gene for being tall, but how tall they become depends on their diet. Lastly, the same could be said about our upbringing, just because we are brought up to behave in one way it doesn?t mean that we always will. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Philosophy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Philosophy essays

  1. Our freedom to make ethical choices is an illusion Discuss

    Furthermore they would argue about our freedom and use the argument of Intuition. They believe that unlike robots we have a mind, and having a mind is necessary to have free will. Peter van Inwagen used the analogy of choosing which branch to go down when travelling along a road,

  2. Sartre is a very strong proponent of strong determinism, that is, he does not ...

    My every perception tells me that I can influence the physical world around me, even in a world that is ruled by the laws of physics. Another flaw inherent to the view is the bleak world it presents to us.

  1. All of our Choices are Predetermined

    As already stated, if our personality is held to be nothing but a result of nature of nurture, then determinism must be accepted as a matter of logical consistency. From this, many Libertarians would stipulate the existence of a "super-natural" element to our personality.

  2. Assess the claim 'Our lives are determined'

    Fatalism does not deal with the causal necessity that determinism does. Going back to the idea of the water on the floor, a determinist would say this is only possible if the water pipe had burst. A fatalist on the other hand would simply say the water will be on the floor regardless of what happens prior to the event.

  1. Was J.S.Mill Right to Claim that Suppressing an Opinion is 'Robbing Mankind'

    One problem with this view is that whilst it does appear to be fairly comprehensive at first it paints a rather idealistic view of truth. Mill's argument assumes that there is an absolute external truth and that this is the ultimate aim of all opinion.

  2. Critically assess the claim that people are free to make their own moral decisions

    Social conditioning suggests that people think and act in line with their social conditioning rather than through being genetically determined or real freedom of choice. This would mean human action must have a distinct social cause and all our actions are because of something within society.

  1. Explain and evaluate the role of conscience in moral decision-making

    He believed that we when we followed our conscience we were following some kind of divine law like a messenger from God. He believed that he could prove this when ?we feel responsibility, are ashamed, are frightened at transgressing the voice of conscience, this implies there is One to whom we are responsible.

  2. Do humans have innate knowledge?

    ergo sum? meaning I think, therefore I am, the existence of God, and some logical propositions like, from nothing comes nothing. Descartes argued that the only thing that we can be completely sure of is our selves. If we were not real, we couldn?t think and by thinking we prove our existence.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work