Argument from free will
From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia
(Difference between revisions)
| Revision as of 19:55, 2 September 2011 Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) ← Previous diff |
Current revision Jahsonic (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Template}} | {{Template}} | ||
| - | :''[[Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains]]'' | ||
| - | The question of '''free will''' is whether, and in what sense, rational agents exercise control over their actions and decisions. Addressing this question requires understanding the relation between freedom and cause, and determining whether or not the laws of nature are causally deterministic. The various [[Philosophy|philosophical]] positions taken differ on whether all events are determined or not—''[[determinism]]'' versus ''[[indeterminism]]''—and also on whether freedom can coexist with determinism or not—''[[compatibilism]]'' versus ''[[incompatibilism]]''. So, for instance, ''hard determinists'' argue that the universe is deterministic, and that this makes free will impossible. | + | The '''argument from free will''' (also called the '''paradox of free will''', or '''theological fatalism''') contends that [[omniscience]] and [[free will]] are [[incompatible-properties argument|incompatible]], and that any conception of [[God]] that incorporates both properties is therefore inherently [[contradiction|contradictory]]. The argument may focus on the incoherence of people having free will, or else God himself having free will. These arguments are deeply concerned with the implications of [[predestination]], and often seem to echo the [[standard argument against free will]]. |
| - | The principle of free will has [[religion|religious]], [[ethics|ethical]], and [[science|scientific]] implications. For example, in the religious realm, free will may imply that an [[omnipotent]] [[divinity]] does not assert its power over individual [[Will (philosophy)|will]] and [[choice]]s. In ethics, it may imply that individuals can be held morally accountable for their actions. In the scientific realm, it may imply that the actions of the body, including the brain and the mind, are not wholly determined by physical [[causality]]. The question of free will has been a central issue since the beginning of philosophical thought. | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | [[Arthur Schopenhauer]] put the puzzle of free will and moral responsibility in these terms: | ||
| - | <blockquote>Everyone believes himself ''a priori'' to be perfectly free, even in his individual actions, and thinks that at every moment he can commence another manner of life. ... But ''a posteriori'', through experience, he finds to his astonishment that he is not free, but subjected to necessity, that in spite of all his resolutions and reflections he does not change his conduct, and that from the beginning of his life to the end of it, he must carry out the very character which he himself condemns... | ||
| - | </blockquote> | ||
| - | |||
| - | In his ''[[On the Freedom of the Will]]'', Schopenhauer stated, "You can do what you will, but in any given moment of your life you can ''will'' only one definite thing and absolutely nothing other than that one thing." | ||
| ==See also== | ==See also== | ||
| - | + | *[[Book of Life#References in the New Testament|Book of Life]] | |
| - | *[[Argument from free will]] (the argument that free will and an omniscient God are incompatible) | + | *[[Molinism]] |
| - | *[[Autonomy]] | + | *[[List of paradoxes]] |
| - | *[[Best of all possible worlds]] | + | |
| - | *[[Buridan's ass]] | + | |
| - | *[[Dilemma of determinism]] | + | |
| - | *[[Existentialism]] | + | |
| - | *[[Fatalism]] | + | |
| - | *[[Freedom]] (disambiguation) | + | |
| - | *[[Free will theorem]] | + | |
| - | *[[Free will in antiquity]] | + | |
| - | *[[Free will in theology]] | + | |
| - | *[[Freethought]] | + | |
| - | *[[indeterminism]] | + | |
| - | *[[Morality]] | + | |
| - | *[[Philosophical zombie]] | + | |
| - | *[[Prevenient grace]] | + | |
| - | *[[Ilya Prigogine]] and the End of Certainity. | + | |
| - | *[[Problem of evil]] (for which human free will is offered as one explanation) | + | |
| - | *[[Problem of future contingents]] | + | |
| - | *[[Responsibility assumption]] | + | |
| - | *[[Shoehorn#Turn of phrase|Shoehorn]] | + | |
| - | *[[Voluntarism (metaphysics)]] | + | |
| {{GFDL}} | {{GFDL}} | ||
Current revision
|
Related e |
|
Featured: |
The argument from free will (also called the paradox of free will, or theological fatalism) contends that omniscience and free will are incompatible, and that any conception of God that incorporates both properties is therefore inherently contradictory. The argument may focus on the incoherence of people having free will, or else God himself having free will. These arguments are deeply concerned with the implications of predestination, and often seem to echo the standard argument against free will.
[edit]
See also
Unless indicated otherwise, the text in this article is either based on Wikipedia article "Argument from free will" or another language Wikipedia page thereof used under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License; or on research by Jahsonic and friends. See Art and Popular Culture's copyright notice.
