Determinism Through The Laws Of Nature example essay topic

Who Decides What? Susan is a middle-aged woman who has recently been diagnosed with breast cancer. While discussing her illness with her doctor, he informed Susan that she had two options: to be treated through chemotherapy, or to wait the cancer out until it finally has its way with Susan and she dies. She chooses the chemotherapy, thus choosing to live. However, the laws of nature insist and indicate that all human beings will die some day; immortality is impossible, improbable, unrealistic and unheard of. It is therefore determined that despite all of Susan's efforts, she will eventually die; although she will one day die, she has chosen, through her free-will to prolong her life and survive her cancer.

This scenario can be better understood when one looks at the definition of free will and determinism. The term free can be loosely defined, as being at liberty to do whatever one wants. Will is either the nickname of a famous actor / rapper (Will Smith) or when one determines by choice. When put together, some may find the term 'free-will,' which would be the ability to choose to do whatever one wants whenever one wants.

One thing that can either negate or compliment free-sill is determinism, or the argument that the laws of nature foreordain everything, and no human has complete control over his / her actions. There are two differing views of the concepts of free-will and determinism. There is the compatibilist view that says free will and determinism can be used together. Then there is the incompatibilist view, which makes the claim that free will cannot exist if determinism does.

The view of incompatibility can then be further broken down into two differing beliefs: the belief in determinism or the belief in free will. One who vehemently believes in determinism is Paul Holbach who feels that though a person can choose things, he is still not free. Holbach believes that a man's life is lived through determinism, from beginning to end since a man does not give his permission to be conceived. Therefore his organization does not in any way depend on man himself.

He claims that man's life is predestined to what and how nature instructs him to live on the surface of this Earth, without man having the ability to veer from it even for the smallest of moments. Holbach then notes that there are often times when man feels like he is in control of his life but that is merely a feeling, or a facade. Man only appears to be the leader of his life by choosing. He argues that just because man performs some type of action that he is settled on doing does not in any way demonstrate his ability to choose freely; the very desire of showing the character, excited by the conflict forms a necessary motive, which determines his will for one action or the other. Finally Holbach concludes that free will is quite incompatible with determinism. He thinks that man makes decision not based on his own free will, but rather based on what the laws of nature have convinced him will be in his best interest.

Holbach claims that a man's customs are in the authority of those who cause him to contract them; he is unceasingly altered by causes, whether visual or hidden, over which he has little or no control, which necessarily adjust his mode of being, give the cast to his thought process and demarcate his manner of acting. He says, that the illusion of free will is merely the result of man having his future and desire set and designed before him in such an organized manner that when he makes a decision based on his desires, it feels like it is what he wants to do; however, it is simply out of his control because it has been foreordained by the laws of nature, whatever Gods may exist and regardless of what man thinks or feels, nothing he does is ever completely in his own control. The view that would negate all of what Holbach has said is the view of compatibility. To review, this view is no more than having free will and determinism coincide with one another. This view would negate Holbach at the fundamental root of the argument; compatibility disputes incompatibility, which then leaves no room for a separation into the two categories of free will and determinism. Free will, when put in laymen's terms means that one does what one wants to do, if and only if one had chosen to do something else, one would have done something else.

Determinism, when put in laymen's terms means that one does not have complete control over his / her actions; the complete and total state of the universe is determined by past facts and the laws of nature. When combined, they amount to someone choosing what he / she wants to choose but not having complete control over that choice. A person acts on his / her free will when they base their actions on reasons that correlate with their own beliefs and desires. But a person has to rethink their actions and base them somewhat on the laws of nature. As with the example in the beginning, the woman uses her free will in her choice to live but determinism through the laws of nature says that she will die anyway.

So with the odds of determinism against her, she can only choose to prolong her life and not to live forever. Another example that shows the compatibility of determinism and free will is procreation. Incompatibility would tell us one of two things: that it is determined through some other being, perhaps the laws of nature, or God, has previously decided that we would or would not procreate; free will would tell us that we would be able to have as many or as few kids as we wanted and it would depend on nothing previously determined. Compatibility on the other hand would tell us that it has already been determined that procreation is necessary for the world to continue, without procreation this world would eventually come to an end for the kids are the future; it would also tell us that it is up to us whether or not we choose to procreate. If I chose not to procreate but my sister chooses to, this world will still continue to grow as is determined by some unknown power, but I through my free will have chosen not to contribute; as for my sister, free will and determinism become compatible because procreation is necessary for the world to continue and my sister has chosen through her free will to aid in keeping the world alive a little longer. The issue of incompatibility and compatibility can be debated; one can, like Holbach, believe that free will and determinism are separate and then conclude that all human beings act in ways that are pre-determined and ultimately believe that we have no control over what we do; one can also believe in the interaction of free will with determinism that we have some control over what we do, however, not complete control.

One can choose to survive cancer and prolong life, and eventually die; or one's life is set out before her in only ways that are preset. One can choose to procreate and keep the world alive, as procreation is the only way to do that or choose to leave that job to someone else; or one can do as the world has determined she will and have a truck load of offspring.