Decision
It is imperatively important for every individual to consider how he or she can influence his or her future. Equally important is to consider how decisions individuals make change the course of their life and ultimately the future. This paper analyzes a life-changing decision that my brother had to make concerning his profession. This issue is important to me because today is the third anniversary of the day that i made that most important decision in my life. The decision was to quit a job with AIG stores in a hurry, in order to start working for McDonald’s on Monday, November 1, 2010; the place I currently work.
Beliefs and values
Before making this decision, I was sitting in my office reflecting on what I had done at AIG. Deep in my heart, I had a great deal to be proud of, but I had to make an important life-changing decision in one afternoon. I had received an appointment letter to start working at McDonald’s, and evidently, I needed the new job. The success I had at AIG was important to me, but I was working under a supervisor who at one time attempted to report me because I left work early. He attempted to do so despite informing him that I had medical problem (I have epilepsy). To worsen the matter, the HR department reacted promptly to the issue because they did not have any medical record on from the department I previously worked in. In brief, I never filed a lawsuit, but someone close to my current supervisor lost her job over the issue and my name was involved. Unsurprisingly, I had stopped moving up the company ladder. It is now 2013 and I am proud of what I did, but back in 2010, people still believed in 401K and maintaining a job to build it, even if you hated the job. I believe in human freedom and doing what I love. In order to analyze the decision taken, the next section will explain a relevant theory of human freedom.
Free Will
There are always cases where individuals are able to choose their wants and desires if they want to. The theory of free will holds that a conscious human being is free to make a decision about which reasonable minds can disagree in circumstance where they are able to make decisions freely without resistance (David, & McKenna, M.2003). It is important to consider whether people have the free will to do what pleases them. The two factors considered important for exploring free will relates to freedom of action and ethical responsibility. Various philosophers have offered different accounts on freedom. Thomas Hobbes suggested that free choice takes place in a situation where there are no external factor influencing the thought process to act freely. (David, & McKenna, M.2003). On the other hand, David Hume contemplated that free will simply refers to the ability choose to act or not act on something depending free choice (Hume, 1748). This implies that, an agent can decide to sleep or not to sleep. Hypothetically, this is the kind of universal liberty accorded to people with exception of those in prisons or under custody. From the point of view of these two philosophers, freedom is simply the capacity to choose a course of action, and the agent has the freedom unless some external forces obstruct him from accomplishing the selected course of action.
Psychological argument for free will holds hat consciousness testifies to our moral freedom. People feel free when performing some acts and make judgments to ascertain if they acted freely in those acts. We distinguish quite appropriately from experiences that we believe we were not responsible or free. In most cases, this conviction is not confined to ignorance. The validity of such evidence can best assessed by performing cautious examination of different mental processes that exhibit the exercise of freedom (David, & McKenna, M.2003). These include deliberation, voluntary attention, and sustained resistance to temptation.
The first The main opposition to various arguments of free will draws from the argument that people can only conscious of their actual actions, rather than their ability act independently or differently on something. This implies that we are only aware of the actions we undertake, the actions we take, and the means of accomplishing the act. Realistic examinations disclose that actions of agents depend on various kinds of processes and volition (Strawson, 2009). In some cases, agents act in accordance according spontaneous impulses, the existing force of present aspiration and purpose.
Consciousness gives evidence that we actively and freely strengthen our causes, resist the stronger inclination, and not only take side but actively choose it (Strawson, 2009). In the real sense, people are forced to make decisions based on free will because in some circumstances, people become subject to their conscious actions, which are not necessarily free, considering the events. Similarly, past experience indicates that motives determine actions of agents, whom always make decisions based on this assumption. Despite the evidence that motives influence the actions of people, it does not automatically imply that all actions inevitably depend on the established cause. This argument makes the statement false, which implies that people are not always able to do whatever they choose. As such, a free volition is “a clueless volition” and rarely exist, unless in some actions such as waking up or sleeping. The implication is that the motive is within the mind itself and that people have no control for their own volition. Free will does not imply the capability of willing in the absence of all motives, or rather choosing anything for that matter (Kane, 2005). People with reasonable mind must therefore make responsible decisions. A rational human being could not rationally desire to make purely evil decisions. However, the morally good presents itself in various forms and under various aspects such as the prudent, the pleasant, the right, the beautiful, and the noble and deliberate cause we can choose among these (Kane, 2005).
However, some philosophers hold the view that free will is not limited to free action and moral responsibility. They suggest that the free will is also an important requirement for rationality, agency, autonomy, and dignity of persons, cooperation, creativity, and the values of love and friendship (Stump, 2003). This shows that free will is central to many philosophical issues.
Application of the theory
Making important decisions is an extra-ordinary that requires high level of consciousness. A salmon does not swim upstream once a year because it decides to, or rather because of some instincts that propels it to do so. It likely has no choice because for that matter. However, quitting a well job with 401K requires one to make a choice, not based on instincts. My decision to quit my current position was inspired by the unfavorable working condition with my supervisor and what other people had to go through such as job termination to ensure some order.
As mentioned in the previous section, free will closely relates to other two important philosophical issues: freedom of action and moral responsibility. In most occasions, people tend to think that free actions of an agent are product of exercising their free will. For example, in my case, my decision to quit the job was influenced by some external factors such as working conditions, family issues, and the fact that I had been offered a new job at McDonald’s. From this we see that one main reason to care about free will is that, it seems necessary for free action. In my case, I must choose to quit the job before I can approach my boss to deliver the message. From this point, if we assume that human decisions are those that results from rational capabilities, it is then evident that the possibility free actions depends on the possibility of free will.
Thomas Hobbes maintains that freedom prevails where there is no external impediment to an agent doing what he wants to do. Even though I had been offered a new job, which I also needed, I still experienced problems in deciding. My success at the company was important to me, but at the same time, my supervisor was not close to give me a fair treatment in my place of work. I had medical problems that at one time forced me to leave work early. In this case, I can argue that the decision was not free will because some external factors influenced my decision to look for a new job and quit my current job. Also of interest was that I had to look for another job before informing the management of my decision to quit the job.
Arguments presented by various philosophers suggests that freedom is simply the ability to select a course of action, and a person is only free if he is not prevented by some external obstacles from completing that course of action. Accordingly, Hume and Hobbes would hold that I was free to quit my job as long as nothing prevented me from my decision to quit the job. However, quitting the job depended on some pertinent issues. It meant that I could no longer build my 401K, and most importantly, I had to take another job in order to live comfortably. Yet still, I did not love the job I was doing and there were no opportunities for promotion in my current job.
After informing my supervisor of my decision to quit the job, I realized that I was right based on my moral and ethical standards, and being willing to accept the fact that I can work for another company because a job is just a job. Sacrificing what I believed simply for a paycheck given to me by someone who did not care about my life and allowing them to control my life decisions was not worth it. Free will is required for moral responsibility. I felt morally responsible to resign from a job where my supervisor did not take into account my personal health when handling work related issues. According to the dominant view on free will and moral responsibility, an agent is not morally responsible for his actions. For my case, I was forced to leave work early because of a medical problem, as such; the supervisor could not have held me responsible for violation of company rules.
References:
David, W. & McKenna, M. (2003). Moral Responsibility and Alternative Possibilities: Essays on the Importance of Alternative Possibilities. NY: Ashgate.
Hume, D. (1748). An enquiry concerning human understanding, Harvard Classics 37.
Kane, R. (2005). A Contemporary introduction to free will. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Strawson, G. (2009). “The Impossibility of moral responsibility,” Philosophical Studies 75: 5-24.
Stump, E. (2003). Aquinas. NY: Routledge.
