Petterssson

Hannah Pettersson

Greg Spendlove

PHIL-1000-403-Sp19

13 March 2019

Physical Determinism Vs. Free Will

There has be argument whether determinism exists or if free will exists and if they’re

even compatible. In this paper, I will be arguing if physical determinism and free will are

compatible to each other or not. To do this, I will first explain what physical determinism is,

second I will explain what free will is, and third I will argue if they are compatible with each

other as well as giving my own opinion while explaining if they are compatible.

Determinism is described to me as everything that is or has happened has been fixed

which means that if determinism is true, then humans don’t have free will. The roots of

determinism can be explained in this statement, “​The idea that ​everything can, in principle, be

explained​, or that ​everything that is, has a sufficient reason for being and being as it is, and

not otherwise ​(Hoefer, 2016).” or from another point of view by the same author but a

different article from the stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, “The world is governed by (or

is under the sway of) determinism if and only if, given a specified way things are at a time t,

the way things go thereafter is fixed as a matter of natural law (Hoefer, 2016).” There are

three main kinds of determinism according to the article although there many many different

kinds, these are the main three: Causal determinism, epistemic determinism, and logical

determinism. Causal determinism is defined as the result of Laws of Nature and of

antecedent conditions and of nothing else (Swartz). Physical determinism falls together in
 Petterssson

the category of causal determinism. The definition of physical determinism means the prior

physical state will bring about another physical state at another time.

Free will is a huge argument in philosophy. It’s the main argument in this class. To

me, free will means we have the power to do what we want, when we want it without being

forced or having a higher power controlling or knowing the future. In an article from the

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, free will is defined as, “a significant kind of control

over one’s actions (O’Connor 2002). No matter how free will is defined, everyone views free

will differently and define it differently which is why the argument is for the most part, the

main argument in all aspects of philosophy. “The main argument of free will is, if god knows

what everyone is going to do before they do it then no one can do otherwise. If no one can do

otherwise than free will doesn’t exist. So, if God knows what everyone will do before they

do it, no one has free will. Thomas Hobbs, a philosopher gave a suggestion on free will. He

suggested ​that freedom consists in there being no external impediments to an agent

doing what he wants to do. The article Free Will mentioned by Hobb’s states that “A free

agent is he that can do as he will, and forbear as he will, and that liberty is the absence of

external impediments(Timpe).” This state means that, in order to have free will, there

isn’t any outside sources forcing or determining the outcome of one’s actions.

Free will and physical determinism can’t be compatible. In order for someone to

have free will, they have the choice to decide the decisions they make. As mentioned

earlier, physical determinism will bring about another physical state. If physical

determinism were true, then we would not be free. In order for us to know if physical

determinism was true, we would have to know the future and be able to predict what is
 Petterssson

to come. As defined in the F​ree Will article, “The course of the future is entirely

determined by the conjunction of the past and the laws of nature (Timpe).” Physical or

causal determinism works more alongside the Laws of Nature. According to the

Necessitarian theory, the Laws of Nature are the "principles" which govern the natural

phenomena of the world. That is, the natural world "obeys" the Laws of Nature (Swartz).

If this theory is true, then causal determinism would have to follow and obey the laws of

nature. That would mean we wouldn’t have the choice to decide what is to come for

ourselves. We wouldn't have free will if causal and physical determinism were true. So

therefore, free will and physical determinism are not compatible with each other.

In Conclusion, I have explained the difference between my two argument topics.

Physical determinism is the will bring about of a prior physical state to a later physical

state. Physical determinism falls under the main category of causal determinism as

referenced from the article, ​Free Will ​and ​Foreknowledge of Free Will​. Free will is

having full control over one’s actions. In my opinion and through the research I have

done, I argued that physical determinism and free will are not compatible with each

other by explaining the laws of nature and how it relates to determinism.

Work cited

O'Connor, Timothy and Franklin, Christopher, "Free Will", ​The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy​ (Summer 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), forthcoming URL =
<​https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/freewill/​>

Tempe, Kevin. “Free Will.” ​Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy​,

www.iep.utm.edu/freewill/#SH3b
 Petterssson

Hoefer, Carl, "Causal Determinism", ​The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy ​(Spring 2016
Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =
<​https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/determinism-causal/​>.

Swartz, norman. “Foreknowledge and Free Will.” ​Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy,​

www.iep.utm.edu/foreknow/#H10​.

Swartz, norman. “Laws of Nature.” ​Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy,​

www.iep.utm.edu/lawofnat/