God Knows the ethical decisions we will make. Discuss
Daniel Flood TM06 ‘God knows the ethical decisions we will make.’ Discuss. Although as humans we behave as if we are free, is it possible that our actions are determined by an external force beyond our control? Although it appears that every event has a cause, some believe that only God knows what we will do and when. God is believed to be omniscient and also omnipresent; that nothing can be hidden from God, as he knows our past, present and future. This theory suggests that perhaps human beings are not free, as if God knows what we will do next week then how can we be said to be acting freely? Augustine believed that in this life God has already decided who will achieve salvation and be saved or not saved, and that human has very little understanding of God’s purpose and plans for us. Some people would argue that if God had already decided whether we are to be saved or not, our actions and purpose become irrelevant, and this would cause people
to lose faith and act immorally, as it would not affect their after-life.There are three main approaches we should consider when answering this question; Hard Determinism, Libertarianism and Soft Determinism/ Compatibles. Hard Determinism is the theory of Universal Causation maintains that everything in the universe (including human action) has a cause which precedes it. This is the basis of science, if it wasn't the case that one event or set of circumstances lead to another, scientific observation, and the conclusions drawn, would be pointless and meaningless. John Locke gave the example of a man who wakes up in a room ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
to lose faith and act immorally, as it would not affect their after-life.There are three main approaches we should consider when answering this question; Hard Determinism, Libertarianism and Soft Determinism/ Compatibles. Hard Determinism is the theory of Universal Causation maintains that everything in the universe (including human action) has a cause which precedes it. This is the basis of science, if it wasn't the case that one event or set of circumstances lead to another, scientific observation, and the conclusions drawn, would be pointless and meaningless. John Locke gave the example of a man who wakes up in a room that, unknown to him, is locked from the outside. He chooses to stay in the room, believing he has chosen freely. In reality, he has no option. However, his ignorance of this gives him an illusion of freedom. Although with hard determinism there is an issue raised about accountability and moral responsibility. If all of our actions are predetermined then surely we can’t be held responsible for them. Kant says that moral responsibility is only possible with free will. He argued for the idea of transcendental freedom, freedom that is as a presupposition of the question "what ought I to do?" This is what gives us sufficient basis for ascribing moral responsibility: the rational and self-actualising power of a person, which he calls moral autonomy: "the property the will has of being a law unto itself." Libertarians accept that universal causation would apply to a mechanistic world, but that this would not influence human choice. A kleptomaniac (someone with an irrational urge to steal in the absence of an economic motive) may be inclined to steal, but has the choice not to. There is a difference between the personality and morality. All of our actions are based on the assumption that we are free. We can only make decisions about what to do if we do not already know what we are going to do. Although by giving us free will to make our own decisions we being to question god’s omniscience. If we have free will can god see our actions before we do them and if so we really have free will or are our actions predetermined by god’s foreknowledge. Soft Determinism accepts that all of our actions are determined. However, there is a difference between Ghandi choosing to fast, and a man being locked up without food. In both cases, the actions are determined, and the men could not do otherwise. However, what determines Ghandi's actions is internal, where as the man locked up has been externally caused to be without food. A compatibility, who believes that determinism and free will are compatible, would draw a distinction between actions caused or determined by our personalities and actions with external causes. Compatibles, unlike hard determinism, allows for moral responsibility. If X does not save a drowning child because X cannot swim, he is not morally responsible. However, if he chooses not to because of his personality, a combination of his conditioning, an event in his childhood etc, then he is to be held responsible. Having discussed the three main conflicting theories of determinism and free will, we can see that there is not truth on either end of the line. As stated earlier in the paper, “it is not either black or white.” The truth can be found in the soft determinism, as it identifies with reality the most. Throughout history, people have always sought freedom, and hard determinism meanly deprives people their ability to act freely and follow internal call of will. The natural response is obvious. Libertarians on the other hand, claim that people are god-like, omnipotent beings, who are completely free in their choice, but at the same time they cannot explain the causes of a particular decision. Surely, free will is compatible with determinism, and the act of writing this paper is a perfect example. The desire to express my thoughts and to pass the course harmoniously coexist with the necessity to complete the assignment given by the professor. If not, then are people truly that free? Or, is there really a common determinant in the universe? Why then there is no order in universe and in molecules?