Determinism can be defined as the philosophical proposal that every incident, choice and act is causally ascertained by an uninterrupted chain of earlier incidences, and further that the chain of circumstances that led to the event will not lead to any other event. The theories of determinism all along the history of philosophy have come from at times motives that are similar.
Certain forms of Determinism can actually be tested empirically also. The converse of Determinism is said to be free will. Essentially, Philosophy is the manner in which some people think about a few distinct questions. The most unique characteristic of philosophy is the way in which logic is used in debating about the various issues.
Determinism is often indicated as the cause-and-effect relationship also. There have been discussions on other forms of Determinism occasionally. Some state that the whole universe is a single determinate system. Other thoughts also indicate multiverse determinism.
The philosophy of Determinism is not to be mistaken for determined human actions caused with its origin in reason, motive or desire. Determinism by means suggests that outcomes are always foreseeable. Different forms of Determinism like casual determinism, pre-determinism, fatalism, theological determinism, and logical determinism exist. The sources of conviction are actually incoherent and intuitive. It is often defined by many contemporary philosophers as a sense of life. The individual sense of life echoes the basic ways in which people relate to the world and people around them. It is essentially individual intuition of the state of things and the way they are supposed to be.
According to philosophical debates, privacy is something that focuses on control over information about the self, while on the contrary it is defended to be a broader concept that is highly essential and vital for human dignity as well as intimacy. Home is related to privacy because both are profoundly related to intimacy.
The progress of scientific knowledge functions as the machine that fuels change in various cultural aspects like technology, philosophy and also arts. Even the religious world perceptions get modified, albeit in a reluctant manner, to suit to the inferences for cosmology of the central paradigm shifts in the field of science. In this essay, the effect of such shifts on one of the most basic "memes" of the humankind, namely, the notions surrounding the issue of free will as opposed to determinism is demonstrated.
All through the history, revolutions in the field of science have been trailed by revolutions in the ways in which people look at the causal processes of nature and their own independent role within and beyond these processes. The aspect of free will as opposed determinism can be understood by humans only within the context of their norms and supposition as to what are the causes behind the various occurrences, both in a cosmic as well as a personal sense. All these various changes are apparent in the world views proposed by famous philosophers like Augustine of the Medieval Era, David Hume of the modern era as well as Democritus of the Classical era.
Casual Determinism is the concept where it is believed that every event is necessitated by other prior events taken together with various laws of nature and everything has to be subordinate to such laws. This approach also allows factoring of deliberate choices and other actions are essential links in the chain of actions that brings about the event. This implies that even deliberate actions and thoughts are determined by chain of events and actions that precede it. Further each of these events can be actually traced back to the origin of the universe itself!
Such relationships could actually be non-specific and not even the origin of the universe. Casual Determinist thinkers believe that nothing in this universe is self-caused. The path of dependence of events or historical determinism is also causal determinism and events are caused by preceding events. In the nomological determinism the events also consider preceding conditions and events – prior condition of the universe and various laws of nature.
Every individual acts in a different manner when around different people. The way each individual behaves with different people is highly different. For instance, a person may behave differently with spouse, in a different manner with parents and in another way with strangers and friends. Though this form of social behavior is argued to be a form of dishonesty, it is not actually so. Individual behavior changes depending on the social contexts. It is extremely appropriate for individuals to behave differently in different social contexts.
According to philosopher Judith Shklar’s example of the political value of privacy, she argues that, in a democratic setting, people need not know someone´s title for refraining from giving out offenses. “The democratic honorifics Mr. and Ms. suggest that all citizens are entitled to equal respect, without revealing their rank or family background or professional accomplishments”. Fate, it believes, has arbitrary power and does not follow any natural rules or laws. Different types of fatalism include theological fatalism where it is believed that God determines everything that happens to human beings. The belief is that it is that all actions are pre-ordained by God and happen.
Theological determinism can also be seen as part of casual determinism in the sense that the precedents are fixed and determined by God. Classical theism claims the existence of a single god and ascribes aspects like omnipotence and immutability to this one god. Ontological arguments are part of the Christian theology and this argument asserts the existence of an all-perfect almighty.
God is required, to prove certain innate ideas which are beyond the sensible world. It is a very simple example that can be used and entails very little or negligible support. This is because as one cannot actually reject or prove the subsistence of God, one can simply say that he exists since they believe he does and know how to twist this to put as an instinctive thought. “If one has a faith in God, then you cannot deny this faith.”
The very description of God is that which is most ideal, and since not anything can be more ideal than God it is only appropriate to confirm the existence of God. Though dubiously imperfect, the theory does show the easy strength that trust holds to the philosophy.
St. Augustine of the medieval era, “insists that it is by the grace of God, through the Holy Spirit, that someone hears and accepts the Gospel.” Augustine's view of the free will essentially dominated the Western culture for more than ten centuries. It was not until the scientific progress truly inspired by Scholasticism started heralding the downfall of the very philosophical notion that had nurtured it that stirrings of drastically different approaches to the premise of human freedom was found. This believes that all propositions in the past present or the future are either real or false.
It is this definition that causes to support logical determinism or casual determinism independently. The issue that comes into clear focus is that of free will. The question is if something is already determined to be true in the future how can be free will be exercised now? This is also referred to occasionally to as the problem of future contingents.
Logical thinking is one that is defined as a process in which an individual makes use of reasoning constantly for arriving at a conclusion. Logical thinking is basically a learned mental process. Quest for certainty has played larger and substantial role in the history of philosophy and over the years it has been assumed that all claims to knowledge become questionable without a basis of certainty regarding the various claims that are made.
The problem of evil is regarded as the greatest hindrance or ordeal to the universal belief of God’s existence. Logical observation of the problem of evil suggests that God and evil cannot exist together in this world. Augustine had essentially grounded free will upon a super sensory reality. This bestowed with the prevalent world view of philosophical dichotomy.
While Augustine’s view of determinism and free will was grounded on a super sensory reality, David Hume contradicted with this view of Augustine instead expressed a process of cause and effect covering up the entire worldly reality. To be precise, Hume spoke about both human and inorganic existence. Hume goes on to state that, the human process of making interpretations based on the experience results in such a possibility. He went on to conclude that all illegitimate and moral systems are grounded on this premise.
Hume's effort to coherently express the conditions of moral responsibility, and the manner in which they can be associated to the issue of free will, could be better understood basically in terms of his perceptions about the logic of our concepts of “liberty” and “necessity.” Free and responsible action, Hume states, must be caused by the agent. There is, thus, no incompatibility that exists amidst free will and determinism.
During the fifth century, Democritus provided an explanation about causality that appears to be amazingly modern. He thought that, even though all happenings are firm and indomitable when regarded within ultimate and impartial terms, the encounter of the humans is generally the outcome of such an intricacy of the various causal chains that, in any instinctively plausible sense, numerous effects can only be perceived to be random.
Democritus repudiated the randomness of phenomena that was implicitly understood if they were Gods’ free actions. He substituted that description with the idea of deterministic laws, which essentially govern the behavior of the atoms, and eventually explained the various phenomena related to atoms, including humans and their actions.
References
Agustine, K. (2012, October 24). Ontological Arguments. Retrieved December 01, 2014, from http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theism/ontological.html
Austin. (2012, December 12). Social vs. Private Masks: Is it Wrong to Act differently in Public? Retrieved December 01, 2014, from Atheism - About.com: http://atheism.about.com/b/2006/04/06/social-vs-private-masks-is-it-wrong-to-act-differently-in-public.htm
Bluck, R. (1961). Plato's Meno. Cambridge: The Cambridge University Press.
DeCew, J. (2012, November). Privacy. Retrieved December 01, 2014, from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/privacy/#PriInt
Forbes, D. (1975). Hume's Philosophical Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
James A. Gould, R. J. (2009). Classic Philosophical Questions . England: Pearson Higher Education.
Morton, A. (2004). Philosophy in Practice: An Introduction to the Main Questions (2nd Ed). Carlton, Victoria: Blackwell Publishing.
The Information Philosopher. (2012). Democritus. Retrieved from The Information Philosopher: http://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/philosophers/democritus/
Thomas, W. R. (2012, December 12). Why Does Anyone Need Philosophy. Retrieved December 01, 2014, from Atlas Society: http://www.atlassociety.org/why_does_anyone_need_philosophy
Warburton, N. (2004). Philosophy - The Basics (4th Ed). Oxon: Routledge.
