Defending free will

The term “free will” defines individual capacity to make a rational choice out of the existing alternatives within the setups. Philosophers argue that such agents of responsibility dictate the narrative behind the concepts of free actions among the individuals. Categorically, free will or the ability to act freely displays the sense of moral responsibilities in the societies according to the philosophers. Many philosophers have argued that the fuss about free will is because of the various factors behind the autonomic decisions and prospective consequences on relationships. Aristotle is known for his philosophical contexts on human belief and developments (Dennett, Daniel, 12-35). His philosophical contexts postulate a concern of voluntary actions. The concept of free will dates back to the existence of humankind. The most important aspect of humanity is the sense of being and controlling the contexts of environmental demands. Human beings are considered superior creatures owing to the fact that the humanity portrays decisive superiority in self-identity. Similarly, Plato accumulated knowledge on the rationality of human governance within the societies. The two philosophers are considered as the fathers of philosophical arguments in literature. However, Augustine became the first philosopher to exploit the concept of will as the origin of determinism. His arguments bear strong relationships with the contemporary philosophy within the societies. Thus, this paper seeks to exploit the theory of free will within the human society as a common element of humanity (Melden, Abraham Irving, 27-30). Free will is a comprehensive concept that has both benefits and challenges in the human culture.

Have any questions about the topic? Our Experts can answer any question you have. They are avaliable to you 24/7.
Ask now

The theory of free will focuses on deliberation of personal aspects based on rationality in the environment. Acting freely helps an individual in several ways within the society. First, free will helps people to choose from their own desires. Predominantly, desires are the driving forces behind human development. The deliberation by the free will helps individuals to recognize the major concepts of self-actualization. Similarly, people proclaim the concerns of values and desires as their basis for decision-making in many instances within the societies. Categorically, values and desires are inseparable and shape the contexts of taking actions within the communities. Therefore, free will is very important in the societies, as a basis to mastering own self in the environments where we live and work. Free will can help an individual to understand the environment and develop positive response mechanisms to the demands of any situation. The modern concepts exploit the problem of free as a strategy to explore human understanding (Wyer & Robert, 10-60). Nonetheless, the problem of “free will” is a conceptive ideology that can allow us to examine the origin of decision-making and impacts of personal judgments. Ideally, it deliberates us from the concepts of comparisons. Notably, the freedom of action is distinctive from the general freedom of existence. Free will presents the agents of rational thinking as the tools of action among people within the various settings in the living environment. Nevertheless, it deliberates the conscience of humanity in every calamity of choice.

Additionally, philosophers argue that the concept of free will is a tool of ownership and control of personal life. The most important difference between humankind and the animals is that humankind can reflect on the process of making the right decision from the existing alternatives. One may desire to drink juice while at the same time there is a desire to eat meat within a similar event. Thus, the final decision during this period belongs to the individual and the outcome is a result of personal control and ownership of the freedom of action in that setup. The individual has the capacity to choose from the presented options without compromising the final impacts of each action. Hence, the sense of ownership of the actions highlights the freedom of choice in action as an element of human prosperity in the communities. Thus, the concepts of free will not only examine the content of personal freedom of action but also exploit the alternative options in the consequences of action.

However, there are several problems with the ideology of free will within the contemporary society. Evidently, it is not ideal to focus on this theory as a point in making a decision. Several factors affect the process of taking action within the societies. It is inefficient to consider those animals who are directed by their goals as agents of free will actions in the society (Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter, 30). They do not own any of being morally responsible yet they pursue their interests with a goal. Consequently, one can act out of pressure as well as based on the demands within their ecological niche. Poverty, for instance, is a common element that not only hinders prospective decision-making but also affects the level of understanding among the victims. Potentially, poverty is common pull factor in many societies that derails the concerns of free action. This way, most of the decisions made by the victims of such calamity may not obey the rule of free will in such case. Additionally, love affairs and relationships pursue the philosophy of the common good. Individuals struggle to satisfy the emotional desires of their partners in the relationship rather than pursuing the conscience of their free will in the action. At the same time, it is not clear whether the theory embraces the concerns of mutual understanding or the concerns of autonomic concerns in many relationships. Moreover, the concerns of many philosophers such as Augustine do not concur with the contemporary issues in the modern societies. Hence, making a general conclusion from such ideologies may be bias and inhuman in some sections of the human society. Concurrently, several explanations proposed by the philosophers, such as Aristotle, may lack an effective background in the contemporary society. In the same way, there may shortage of link to explain the variations in human behaviors.

In conclusion, free will is a theory that highlights the nature of human beings in many societies. The basics of human understanding lie in the power to understand the prospects of self-manipulation. This way, self-actualization is an element of free will that erupts when an individual decides to act of a free state of the mind. It is true that free will is a comprehensive aspect of human existence that dictates the psychological activities of the persons concerned. Numerous concerns exist in the human culture that seeks to oppose and defend the concept of free will in the society. Free will is evident in the rationality of judgments and actions among individuals in the culture. Moreover, it highlights the ideology of action control, ownership of the consequences and deliberation from the external pressure in the living environments.

 

Works cited

Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter. Moral psychology: Free will and moral responsibility. MIT Press, 2014.

Wyer, Robert S. The automaticity of everyday life: Advances in social cognition. Vol. 10. Psychology Press, 2014.

Dennett, Daniel C. Elbow room: The varieties of free will worth wanting. MIT Press, 2015.

Melden, Abraham Irving. “Free action.” (2017).