An Analysis of the Free Will Problem, Creativity, and Contextualization
There are many arguments for and against the notion of free will. For as long as humanity has been discussing the concept of the mind, so has the debate about choice and its foundation been under question. Do we as a society create our own paths or do we simply follow a predetermined set of functions, reactions, and ingrained social ques to result in the patterns and actions that eventually occur. There are three widely established viewpoints on this matter of free will that stem from the argument of choice or predetermined nature: the deterministic viewpoint, the Libertarian’s concept of free will, and the combined representation of compatibilism. Debates have flourished over each stance without a definite conclusion on the topic. As I explain and proceed through the three viewpoints, I will argue that free will, in context of an ever-expanding pool of choices and options of human development, does exist, allowing for contextualization and creativity to function in tandem with one another.
To begin this argument, there is an importance to be put on the three main argumentative stances. Fully understanding each position’s main points of contention is key to developing a fully fleshed out perspective of what free will is and is not. First, we will discuss the ideas of determinism and indeterminism. The deterministic viewpoint believes that the decisions that occur have no true option of choice and that fundamentally every action has some resulting influencer or cause to shape the reality of the action. There is no freedom in this choice but rather a simple equation of factors to reach the result that was guaranteed to occur. Determinism believes that the mind simply conjures and illusion of freedom to placate those who wish to believe that their actions are self-determined rather than a result of outside or internal influences. From this perspective, free will is nonexistent. In contrast, the Libertarian concept’s approach to free will is in direct contrast to determinism. This viewpoint believes that all actions are the result of choice rather than predisposition and that determinism has no compatible relation when it comes to free will. They are almost more inclined to indeterminism, where human choice and have no outside influences that affect the end results (Vargas, 2004. P404) Indeterminism states that everything is pure chance, and nothing can be determined. Lastly compatibilism attempts to reconcile free will with determinism, stating that the two issues can be paired with one another without completely unbalancing either. Compatibilism broaches the subject of free will by stating that some actions are in fact capable of being made by free will but still likewise have influencing factors that determine the outcome of the action. This argument hinges on the idea that all actions have casually sufficient conditions that are met and free will enacts upon th...