Meacham 1

Jesse Meacham

Professor Guilmette

PHI 2010 021

19, November 2017

To Be Deterministic or Optimistic?

Freedom is a state of being that empowers one to be candid in their actions without fear

of external bias in any form. Generally, humans believe that they possess the power and will to

make their own decisions they are free.. Determinism is a model of human freedom that is

widely based around the physical laws governing the universe, postulating that the future

causally determines the past. Determinists believe that the physical universes causal nature

transcends all that occupies it including living beings and their individual decisions, thoughts,

and ideas; hence, people that occupy the universe cannot exercise free will or take responsibility

for their actions because everything is causally predetermined. Compatibilists or soft

determinists, recognizing the disturbing repercussions of hard determinism, modify the classical

deterministic approach and permit the possibility for free will so long as it aligns with ones

internal desires. Despite the compromise, compatibilists are still determinists, whom believe that

the past causally determines the future which is a concept that jeopardizes the preservation of

cultural values upheld by humanity, values such as: morality, ethics, religion, improvement of

living, crime and punishment. Hence, the best theory surrounding human free will is that of

indeterminists, who believe in a universe of possibilities filled with free choice and behavior

independent of the past, which escapes the pessimistic outlook of determinism and makes the

most compelling argument that aligns with the human experience.

 Meacham 2

Paul Henri Thiry, known as Baron dHolbach, wrote The System of Nature, which

essentially was a Determinists bible, essentially (Chaffee 4.2). Once the definition-based

explanation of determinism is understood, its important to reflectively analyze the logic behind

a front-runner of the deterministic approach whom in this case is dHolbach. DHolbach believed

that our will, along with all of the other mental states of consciousness such as motive,

reflection, and reason are produced by the chemistry of the brain, and they are necessary

products of the brains interaction with the environment (Chaffee 4.2). DHolbach argues that

mental states govern the behavior of humans and that these are brought on by environmental

cues which are causally determined from past experiences. Unbiasedly, the argument cannot

entirely be debunked its true that mental operation follows environmental cues, but whether or

not decision-making can be freely exercised after such deliberation is up for debate. DHolbach

believes that there is no room for personal freedom amidst these particular mental states,

which doesnt correspond favorably with the variance that is generally seen in human decision

making. Characteristic of a determinist, dHolbach consistently compares the physical laws of

the universe and the exercising of free will in humans which are simply incomparable and speaks

to the lack of synonymy between his theory and experienced reality. The universe is governed by

physical laws which are causal for the most part, i.e. burning fuel will release energy, but

Determinists are incorrect in trying to explain humans behavior with the same logic. Its true

that the laws of the universe are generally causal and humans exist within the universe, but the

laws of the universe have yet to be fully understood. Therefore, Determinists falter in using an

indefinite concept to validate their viewpoint; the energy released from burning fuel could be a

figment of the imagination uncaused by the initiating flame or the oxygen in the air. Nature
 Meacham 3

might proceed through the most favorable pathways in order to govern life as its known, yet

such a consistent and structured framework has yet to be observed by the human condition.

The viewpoint of the determinist portrays a world that is too rigid and calculated to be

reasonably matched with the imperfect random behavior displayed by humans. Its true that most

of the future can be predicted using causal relationships from the past (i.e. Poor gun control

causes mass shootings). However, the belief that all universal workings follow a deterministic

approach is unrealistic when it comes to human beings: the same potential for higher-order

thinking that is unique to humans allowing for morality and conscience decision making also

causes randomness and irrational behavior. Statistics might prove true that most children follow

in the footsteps of their parents, which would appease a determinist as it aligns with their theory

upbringing and external environment causing expected behavior. However, they wouldnt like

to converse about the cases where underprivileged people change the cycle of their predecessors.

Even if the determinist entertained the idea of someone escaping the effects of their

surroundings, they would claim that the specific individual was determined to make such

decision basically put, they had no free will in making this decision, and it was causal to their

past experiences. This is a threatening ideology towards the basic and fundamental operations of

human society insinuating that people cannot change and improve themselves Why would

someone obey laws, submit themselves to a higher power, or behave with a moral conscience if

this were the case? Make no mistake, the theory isnt primarily unattractive to people merely

because its information that they dont want to acknowledge: it simply doesnt align with the

human experience nor the conditions of living as a higher-order thinking being. Imagine the

repercussions people are sent to prison or jail for disobeying the laws of the land if people are

unable to exercise free choice then this specific group of people cannot ever be anything but
 Meacham 4

prisoners of society. If this were the case, they have no purpose to try to rehabilitate their

behavior, because they are helpless to the future because its determined by their past.

Additionally, religion is one of the founding doctrines of ethical civilizations in fact, the law as

its enforced in different regions of the world has evolved from the very books that promote

these religious doctrines. In the past, the absence of these religious principles caused for anarchy

and savagery which was determined to be harmful to the quality of human life. Under the

deterministic viewpoint, religion is meaningless because ones faith in a higher-power doesnt

change their direction in life nor does it offer closure with respect to the totality of ones

existence. Determinism lacks the explanation of the human condition in the form of randomness,

which would require such theory to embrace free will, which it so clearly does not.

Indeterminism is the savior of the free will theories mainly due to its flexibility in terms

of the scope of past theories. Indeterminism holds that humans are fully able to make decisions

and initiate actions independently of any influences on [ones] thinking (Chaffee 4.4).

Essentially, this theory combines the distinguishing soft deterministic view with the pitfalls of

determinism to create a very flexible outlook. Its now possible that ones past doesnt

necessarily impact their future behavior, that free will is exercisable and people can be held

responsible for their actions to a certain extent. In William James The Will to Believe, he

differentiates the universal outlook of determinism versus indeterminism. James describes

determinism as a universe of actualities, in which no other possibilities can exist except those

that occur, and indeterminism as a universe of possibilities, in which no matter what events

have occurred in the past, there are still multiple possibilities in the future (Chaffee 4.4). This is

quite a simplified yet powerful comparison which has led James to dismissing any form of

determinism, including soft, due to the unacceptable view that comes along with any form of
 Meacham 5

determinism (Chaffee 4.4). William James continues by pointing out the flaw in deterministic

logic in his statement, by advancing all-encompassing theoretical explanations for every event

that occurs, [determinists] are making it impossible to ever assess the truth or falsity of their

theories (Chaffee 4.4). If the theory of determinism cannot establish clear criteria for

evaluating its truth and falsity, then it amounts to little more than a mere conception fulminated

as a dogma and based on no insight into details (Chaffee 4.4). James then questions the

deterministic pessimism that plagues their view of the world where even regret or dreams are

viewed as futile and illogical (Chaffee 4.4). William James describes the many instances of

regret or wishes that humans morally express and condemns the deterministic outlook for its

absence of such reflection after all, how can a theory of freedom be accurate if it cannot align

with the human condition of conscientious reflection and morality? This pessimistic outlook of

determinism paints the image of people as robots within human flesh and fails miserably at

explaining the beliefs and convictions of the lived experience, and it is also a perspective that is

ultimately self-contradictory and not rational in any human sense (Chaffee 4.4). For this reason,

indeterminism is the clear front runner in terms of the theories of free choice in human nature.

Humans can change their behavior pattern, hence events from the past can be irrelevant,

but the decisions made in the present are capable of being spontaneously made without external

interference. The deterministic approach states that future behavior is dependent on the past, the

universe will never be better or different in any way, and all that happens occurs because it

must happen in exactly the way in which it does (Chaffee 4.4). This ideology lacks connection

to the human experience and condition, and lacks the ability to be rationally challenged.

Determinism indirectly opposes the values that humanity instills in people: if someone cannot

impact their future or be responsible for their actions, are they really living? Hence,
 Meacham 6

Indeterminism is the most plausible point of view in terms of free choice theory alternatives due

to its widely-encompassing flexibility on the sensitive issue of humanity and its association with

free will.
 Meacham 7

Works Cited

Chaffee, John. Philosopher's Way, The: Thinking Critically About Profound Ideas. Pearson,

2016. Print.