Freedom vs. Determinism: A Philosophical Debate
Freedom
The condition of rational human beings makes them capable of thinking for themselves, meaning that they can also decide against the life choices they face.
Approaching the Notion of Freedom
The absence of obstacles that prevent us from doing what we want, or the ability to choose or want something or another.
- External Freedom: Freedom of action, absence of external obstacles that hinder the action, i.e., being able to do what we want without anything or anyone hindering us.
- Internal Freedom: Freedom of choice or free will, ability or opportunity to decide or want this or that when this decision is unknown, i.e., not caused.
These two kinds of freedom are not something completely different, and there is a close and mutual relationship between them. External freedom is also known as political freedom because it is the political and social factors that allow its presence, although it can occur or not; its existence is not problematic. Internal freedom, indeed, has problems, as we can doubt its existence.
Determinism or the Absence of Freedom
We consider the existence of freedom something of common sense and therefore tend not to question it. We possess the conviction that freedom continues to be a very strong belief, and even if we think we can put it in question, we believe that it shows that we are not free. The deterministic conception is a philosophical claim that everything is determined, that is, inevitably caused, denying the existence of freedom. It is based on the principle of causality, which says that actions are determined by a factor in the presence of which they inevitably occur. We could say that this factor is ourselves; I am the cause of my actions because I have taken the decision that is the cause of what I do. The principle asserts that any event, accidental or even mental, has a cause. Also, my decisions are caused; there is an X factor that I do not control and that makes it inevitable that I take this decision. As we have no freedom of decision according to determinism, it might seem intuitive because it is more or less easy to determine the causes of natural events, but it is very difficult to establish the causes of human events. As well as for the deterministic, the belief that the main reason we believe in freedom is so obvious that it is not a true belief, but the difficulty we have to establish the causes of our desires and choices, insisting that the difficulty in finding the cause of something does not mean that it does not have one.
Physical Determinism
All reality is determined and can be explained by natural laws. The behavior of all beings in the universe, even of organic beings, is governed by the fixed and stable laws of matter, based on a mechanistic worldview. Mechanism holds that reality must be understood as a mechanism or machine. If the whole universe is comparable to a machine, then it operates in a similar way as machines do, all its states and actions follow fixed patterns. One of the proponents of this determinism was the French physicist and mathematician Pierre Simon Laplace (1749-1827). The progress achieved in astronomy by applying the laws of Newtonian mechanics led to the claim that if we knew the state of all matter and the laws that regulate it, then we would know the past and future of the universe.
Genetic Determinism
It is often focused on explaining the behavior of organic beings, especially animals and humans, determined by the code defined genetically. We are nothing more than the manifestation of our genes, which determine our physical constitution, our character, and our actions. Richard Dawkins, a prestigious zoologist and ethologist, defended the unusual and radical hypothesis: organisms are nothing more than the invention of our genes to ensure their own survival; the behavior of individuals is determined by their genes.
Environmental or Educational Determinism
It is not genes that determine our behavior, but environmental factors (social, cultural, economic, family, etc.) and even educational and learning factors. For advocates of this position, any action may be taken as a response to environmental conditions. We may modify the influence of changing environmental conditions by learning how to do certain actions. This will be promoted through positive reinforcement and inhibiting other behaviors through negative reinforcement. Because human behavior is permeable and learning is an effect of environmental stimuli, we may change it by manipulating them.
Economic Determinism
For those who hold this position, it is economic factors that determine our behavior, both socially and individually. Everything can be understood if we analyze the performance of the economy. One of the trends that influence the defense of economic factors in human behavior is Marxism. Followers of Marx did not hesitate to consider certain economic factors as causes of our actions.
Theological Determinism
The very existence of something that is beyond human beings and that determines their actions. Everything we do is planned ahead and fixed either by fate or destiny or a higher or divine will. Man is not master of his acts, a puppet in the hands of fate or the divine. The only thing that remains is to represent as well as possible a drama that is already written. For reformist theology, God is omniscient because what has not happened is already somewhat established. The reformers said that the human will is not such, as it is available to the divine will.
Indeterminism or the Existence of Freedom
Despite the consistency of the deterministic arguments, many thinkers resist accepting this philosophical concept and its consequences. The defenders of freedom, against the determinists, argue that these have confused conditioning factors with determining factors.
- Determinants: Equivalent to causes of action, human behavior is considered an unavoidable consequence of factors humans do not control.
- Conditioning Factors: The equivalent of the reasons for action, human behavior is influenced by such external factors, but they are not considered the result.
The defense of freedom usually involves a defense of indeterminism in the sense that our actions and decisions are not determined but conditional. Indeterminism, in affirming human intervention, does not mean indifference. Considering that our decisions are not caused by factors does not mean we are indifferent to something or another, i.e., that there is nothing that influences our decisions. To consider that our choice is indifferent to any factor would mean that our action is arbitrary and irrational because we would decide without rational reasons. Being inclined to defend indeterminism does not mean indifference, nor does it promote inaction or the irrationality of behavior.
Evidence of Freedom
One of the problems faced by defenders of freedom is how to demonstrate its existence separately. Freedom does not need proof. Descartes is a representative author of this position. From this perspective, the belief that an act of free will is so obvious a truth in itself, we can consider it an axiom: not demonstrated but is the basis on which to sustain many of our beliefs about man.
Theological Indeterminism
Unlike reformed theology, Catholic theology accepts divine omnipresence without denying the choice of human beings. God knows in advance what humans will decide and act like, but this does not annul humanity’s freedom. God knows all reality, but that does not mean that it is completely determined. For Catholics, God and freedom are compatible. St. Thomas Aquinas is one of the most representative philosophers and theologians of Christian philosophy. According to this thinker, humans have freedom of choice based on the understanding that a trial shows that it is preferable. While we want to achieve it, it is the understanding that moves the will to choose one thing or another. Can I be wrong and therefore choose evil instead of good? The only way that has absolute knowledge of God is good, although it is just not at all or little freedom.
Freedom and Morality
The resistance to accepting some of the consequences of the non-existence of freedom is one of the reasons that lead to defending its existence. If human beings do not have freedom of choice, then it is not possible to speak of responsibility or morality. We can only make someone responsible for his actions if he really is, i.e., if he acted knowingly, voluntarily, and freely. Having freedom of choice and having to take responsibility for our actions makes us the only animal for which morality exists. Kant is one of the philosophers who advocated this idea more brilliantly, expressed in a Kantian way: freedom is a postulate of practical reason (or morality), i.e., although freedom is unprovable, it is presumed because it makes morality possible.
Physical Indeterminism
During the twentieth century, physics has been marked by the birth and development of quantum mechanics, which has achieved notable successes in microphysics and represents a revolution over classical physics. The research of eminent physicists such as Max Planck, Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrödinger, and others shook the mechanistic vision of the world. One of the reasons is that this theory uses statistical probabilistic laws in its explanations that do not add to the traditional concept of physical law, which is a causal law that determines precisely the causes and consequences of events. Quantum mechanics has led to the emergence of a series of philosophical interpretations of those who defend the indeterminism of reality. It is noteworthy that carried out by the Copenhagen school and its principal representative, Bohr, whereby quantum mechanics lays bare the reality that prevails to a certain degree of indeterminacy. Mechanistic determinism, according to which everything has a cause and responds to a precise and stable law, would be false. There is room for arbitrariness and chance, at least, this is so because, on the atomic scale, quantum mechanics has demonstrated that the behavior of atoms cannot be predicted at all since their position and their movement can only be established approximately. Other authors have opposed this interpretation of quantum mechanics. Einstein said, “God does not play dice.” At this point, it is necessary to clarify the fact that quantum physics using probabilistic laws in their explanations cannot deduce that the objective laws governing the world are also probabilistic. Physical theories are not a picture of reality but a way of bringing us in to understand it. Whether reality is determined or not is something that does not compete, as Popper says, with the physical constitution. The ultimate nature of reality is a matter for metaphysics.