Can We Solve The Free Will Problem? Goldstein vs. Church Land

Introduction

Whenever people claim that they did things out of their own free will, they imply that they had the option of acting contrary to the said action. Hence, free will is depicted through the options one has. Human behavior is controlled or regulated through laws because every action performed may not have been averted (Goldstein np). The underlying issue of free will is tied to human nature and the relation between the world and other natural principles. Sometimes, the monistic nature of human beings dictates their decisions and fate. In either case, free will is dictated and influenced through the decision making and conscious emotions and intentions.

Rebecca Goldstein Perspective on Free Will

Goldstein's perspective on free will depends on the interaction human have with the natural environment and their innate nature. Goldstein processes her thoughts through human societies and regulations. For instance, she claims that a free individual has a limited number of options. Hence, an independent individual's options are predetermined even before he or she makes them.  No one can choose without considering the consequences that will follow after the decisions have been made (Goldstein np). There is always more than one element preventing human beings from having free will.  Also, her perspective tends to look at man as the person who is influenced by society and other issues of life that surround him. Free will has its restrictions hence it is not free will. There are three elements that Goldstein uses to make her argument- human nature, consequences, and underlying intentions of a persons' actions. Free will creates a sense of liberty and urgency hence the readiness to initiate, implement, and regulate one volitional deed. Under these boundaries, it is difficult to define free will although it is vital to the community and individuals of the society.

Goldstein depends on the organizational structure and systems of the world. For instance, the world has been ruled through the government which put in place rules which in turn drive determinism. Apart from philosophy, subjects such as neuroscience have helped to solidify Goldstein's argument as they look at the biological aspect of decision-making hence bring on board intuitive concepts. To be free, one has to have more than three options at hand or implementation strategies. More so, if a person experiences an involuntary situation, he or she will not have a chance to dictate the outcome of the entire situation. Therefore, free will only exist if one can control certain situations (Goldstein np). The decision-maker has to be able to control his actions and how he goes about them must also be under his total control. For one to get free will, one has to the initiator of those actions without encountering any challenges and other underlying processes. It is vital to note that the entire world revolves around predictive principles. Thus what seems like free will has its basis controlled through society. Human free will is restricted to the regulations which govern them. The confines of the law and society tend to make human beings depend on the consequences attached to their actions. In simpler terms, humans have no free will due to the numerous restrictions placed in their wake. The chance that comes with making a decision is determined by more than the underlying intention that drives the entire course of action. In summary, Goldstein claims that there is no free will due to the restrictions placed on human societies and even the nature of human beings does not allow them to have free will.

Patricia Churchland Perspective on Free Will

 Patricia Churchland looks at free will in terms of self-control and other biological mechanisms that bring about the state of free will. Her ideology proves that humans only have a free will based on their mind. Humans have free will but their consciousness and self-control, hinder them to do as they will. While human beings are accustomed to getting what they want when they want, they have to come to terms with life and its numerous principles governing life. For instance, behavioral routines make influences human actions and how they respond to free will situations. How humans make decisions and regulate impulsions are in line with other satisfactory experiences.  The hormonal makeup of human being shape they think and manage themselves. These underlying mechanisms control the outcome and societal behavior (Churchland 175). The obvious nature of responsibility is central to free will as it determine the independence and range of options one has. Thus, free will has to consider communal needs and the obligation one has to society. The concept of free will has to factor in the volition actions and the comprehensive actions influencing the emergence of free will. From the time to time proposition of life, human nature free will hinges on already put in place managerial systems. Hence, the manifestation of self-control is seen in the management of life issues. Humans present intelligence and self-control in terms of actions. Besides, free will cannot be an illusion due to self-control. Aspects of free will such as the law are meant to control human nature and hold him or her responsible for the outcome that comes as a result of the underlying actions.

 Churchland defines free will through the application of the brain self-control mechanisms. Unlike Goldstein who sites free will as the lack of restriction, Churchland asserts that the brain creates options and mannerisms through which people have free will. Life is made up of consequences and actions behind the significances. Also, self-control mechanisms enable a person to have a balance between emotions and judgmental facts before arriving at a decision (Churchland 187). Humans have to evaluate one thing over the other and pick options based on advantages and other things that favor them in certain aspects. Therefore, if Churchland was to respond to Goldstein, he would have told him of the things that make up free will do not take anything away from it. For instance, if one has to choose between two to three perspectives, he or she has to choose the best. Societal restrictions do not hinder free will instead they reinforce the self-control aspects of the human brain.

 In summary, humans have free will if they collect information, deliberate on issues before making a decision. According to Goldstein, humans do not have any free will because their decisions are already predetermined based on societal norms and the underlying intention. However, Churchland claims that more than one aspect of the decision-making process has to come to terms with brain mechanisms, and the decisions are not driven by another person.

 

 

Reference

Churchland, Patricia. Free Will, Habits, and Self-Control. 7th ed., W.W. Norton & Company, 2013.

Goldstein, Rebecca. "Mysteries of Free Will | Closer To Truth". Closertotruth.Com, 2020, https://www.closertotruth.com/series/mysteries-free-will#video-1741.