According to Walter Stace(925) free will and predictability are compatible. This means that it is possible to determine the action an individual would take despite that particular individual acting out of free will. Stace claims that all human actions whether free or not free are determined by various causes. The difference between the free willed actions and those that are not free arise from the nature of causes that lead to the actions. Free will actions are determined by psychological desires or motives that arise from within the individual while actions that are not from free will arise from physical external drives that compel an individual to act in a given predictable manner.
Walter Stace would consider the conversation between the experimenter and Brandt as an example of free will. Brandt on observing the learner being uncomfortable requests the experimenter to check on the learner’s condition. When the experimenter declines, claiming that Brandt has no choice, Brandt reiterates that they all agreed to the experiment out of their own free will and refuses to proceed with the experiment. This shows that Brandt is not being compelled by an external force, but reacts based on her reason and logic. The experimenter is wrong when he tells Brandt that she has no choice since Brandt has the choice of terminating the experiment which she does. The experimenter expected that Brandt like many other subjects would proceed with the experiment with the knowledge that the experimenter was to bear any responsibilities arising from the experiment. She however chooses the most rational decision expected of a logical thinking human being and refuses to continue with the experiment based on the learner’s condition. She therefore acted out of her own free will.
Work cited
Stace, Terence Walter. “ Is Determinism Inconsistent with Free Will?” (ed) Religion and the
Modern Mind. UK: Macmillan, 1953. Print.
