Freewill Through The Eyes Of Stace example essay topic
Stace's main argument in stated in, "The dispute is merely verbal, and is due to nothing but a confusion about the meaning of words. It is now what is fashionably called a semantic problem". Words are all we really have to explain our thoughts. We can add to words by using body language and pictures, but even these are still explained in words. Words are given meaning, according to Stace, by, "Common usage is the criterion for deciding whether a definition is correct or not". This means that words should be used, as everyone knows them.
The exception to this is slang. So to a point it is philosophers changing the words of freewill and creating their own slang definition and like Stace says, "the mistake which the deniers of freewill have made is rather subtle and difficult to detect". Stace feels that the wrong definition of freewill is the ability to do something else. On the topic of morality and Stace's quote of, "if there is no free will there can be no morality".
This quote makes a lot of sense, if there is no free will then why do we spend so much time worrying about morals. Society today spends much of its time "trying" to teach people ethical behavior. This is why there are laws and rules everywhere you go and in everything you do. If we had no freewill we would either not do anything wrong or it would just be our nature or outside forces causing us to do them. In either case it would be useless to have rules to change our judgment because there would be no judgment if there was no freewill. Like Stace said", Morality is concerned with what men ought and ought not to do.
But if a man has no freedom to choose what he will do, if whatever he does is done under compulsion, then it does not make sense to tell him that he ought not to have done what he did and that he ought to do something different". Then he continues on to say, "All moral precepts would in such case be meaningless. Also if he acts always under compulsion, how can he be held morally responsible for his actions? How can he, for example, be punished for what he could not help doing?" Our actions can definitely be shown as an example of freewill. Stace shows the difference between acts freely done and those not in this table. Free Acts Un-free Acts Gandhi fasting because he wanted to free India.
The man fasting in the desert because there was no food. Stealing bread because one is hungry. Stealing because one's employer threatened to beat one. Signing a confession because one wanted to tell the truth.
Signing because the police beat one. Leaving the office because one wanted one's lunch. Leaving because forcibly removed. This table shows a direct distinction between free and un-free acts therefore showing once again that freewill does exist. Stace believes that outside factors influence our decisions but we still can do what we want. The outside factors can be anything from genetics to the physical environment.
I feel that people make a decision based on what influences they let affect them. Outside factors are only as persuasive as you let them be and in the end you will have the final say. Stace is definitely correct in saying that freewill exists. Philosophers are definitely just using the term freewill however they see fit and not how society really sees it.
Stace makes this point by saying, "It is plain that if we define free will in this way, then free will certainly exists, and the philosopher's denial of its existence is seen to be what it is-nonsense". Let freewill live and choose wisely what you wish to effect your daily life.