The notion "freedom" has many meanings, each of which applies to a particular sphere of life of the individual. Solving the problem of freedom is impossible without an understanding of the specifics of these values, and without disclosing the inner relationship of liberties. Most of all, to speak of freedom, it is possible to speak about two of its basic values.
Speaking about free will, there is a possibility not to hesitate to define their internal desires, aspirations, and the second value is freedom of action, that is, the absence of obstacles to the implementation of the desired action. On the one hand, it is known that each event has a cause. The chain of reasons goes very far. It seems that what is happening today, predetermined events of the past. On the other hand, there is the idea that people can themselves initiate action, a person can really change the future.
The metaphysical problem of freedom of will is the problem of the relation between the causal order between the fact that all events are determined, and the fact that we make a free choice or free action. Nevertheless, this is not an abstract problem. In view of the availability of freedom constructed the notion of identity and responsibility.
Free will is an opportunity for a person to make a choice, regardless of the specific circumstances. The philosophy for a long time conducted the dispute the existence of free will and the determination of its nature. There are two opposing positions: the metaphysical libertarianism is the statement that determinism is incorrect and, therefore, free will exists, or it is possible, and hard determinism, that is, a statement that free will does not exist and, thus, determinism is true. (Goodwin, p.11) Both of these positions if they argue that determinism is incompatible with free will, are considered incompatibilism. If the role of determinism in this matter is denied, these positions are called compatibilism, or soft determinism. The principle of free will has consequences in religion, ethics and science. For example, in the religion, free will implies that the desires and choices people can co-exist with the divine omniscience. In ethics, the existence of free will determines the moral responsibility of people for their actions. In addition, in science, the study of free will can identify ways to predict human behavior.
Hard determinism is the doctrine about that the free will is compatible with determinism. At the same time, it is possible to say that free will in compatibilism is defined so that it can coexist with determinism. The opponents of compatibilism believe that freedom can be present without the involvement of metaphysics. The opposite position incompatibilism uses the metaphysical notion of free will, which has never been clearly stated in the opinion compatibilist.
The principle of hard determinism clearly suggests a lack of free will, because everything in a deterministic system is interconnected and there is no place to chance. Accordingly, any a person action determined in advance, because they have basically any reason. All mental throwing become an illusion because the decision was pre-ordained
Metaphysical libertarianism is one of the philosophical positions incompatibilism. Advocates of libertarianism believe that the concept of free will assumes that the individual in certain circumstances can choose from several possible actions. (Randolph)
Libertarianism is divided into physical and non-physical or natural theory. The non-physical theories believe that the events in the brain that lead to action cannot be reduced to physical explanations. This dualistic interactionism assumes that the non-physical mind or soul will affect the physical causes.
Compatibilists, advocates of soft determinism argue that determinism is compatible with free will. While there may be more accurate to state that compatibilists define free will in such a way that it can coexist with determinism. From the standpoint of compatibilist freedom can exist or be absent for reasons not related to metaphysics. Here, free will as freedom of action is determined in accordance with their own motives, without the intervention of others. In contrast, the position of the opponents of incompatibilism is associated with a certain metaphysical free will.
Compatibilists claim that the truth of determinism does not matter. What matters is that the will of a person is the result of his or her own desires, and not determined by external conditions. soft determinism sees the failure of hard determinism that his position cannot be justified person responsible for their actions, cannot be moral approval or condemnation. If everything is predetermined and there is of necessity if human actions are caused, ultimately, is not beyond its control, and it is impossible to assign him responsibility for the actions committed by them.
Hard determinism, for its part, believes that the unconditional act of man is inconceivable, soft determinism has no reasonable grounds; therefore, it can be assumed that a solution should be sought only on the basis of hard determinism.
The principle of determinism is revealed in the balance between freedom and necessity. Freedom can only be where there is a choice. Freedom can only be if there is a choice. The objective basis for this is the range of possibilities defined by the action of objective laws and the diversity in which these laws are implemented. Freedom is a "perceived need" and human activities on the development of practical necessity, that is on the mastering the means of life and individual development. Determinism applied to human beings has always meant the conditionality of its behavior interaction of internal and external factors, its material and psychic nature. For a long time, it was identified with the complete negation of the person freedom of choice and free will. However, a person is a carrier of an autonomous moral principle and, therefore, free.
Currently, within the framework of philosophy man is regarded as a special kind of being, which, in contrast to all other phenomena in the universe, realizes his behavior unity of opposite sides and relations, that is essence and existence, objectivity and subjectivity, appropriate conditionality (determinism) and freedom. It can be concluded that the hard determinist philosophy is best applied in practice. It does not prevent a person to experience remorse or satisfaction after he decides to carry out this or that act, though his choice was predetermined and experience the feeling this is only the result of the initial training.
Although these emotions can set their own reasons, their message is denials of causality, since the depth of satisfaction or remorse unanimously come from a human implicit belief that he could act differently than did actually. That is to say, that his consciences cannot express themselves differently in the emotional message of approval or disapproval, even if a person knows that from the point of view of logic there is nothing to praise or blame because it is not a free person, but a moving clockwork.
References
Goodwin, James C., Research In Psychology: Methods and Design, Six Ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2010. Web. 17 June 2016.
Randolph, Clarke, Incompatibilist (Nondeterministic) Theories of Free Will. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2008. Web. 17 June 2016.
