In philosophy and social sciences, a debate regarding the existence of free will resulted in the creation of a deterministic approach. The classical doctrine of determinism suggests that every event and incident in human life is controlled by laws of nature and mystical powers. Thus, the deterministic views opposed the concepts of freedom and free choice. Some critics of the predetermined existence advocated the freedom of thought. Christian List suggested that humans’ intrinsic motives should be distinguished from the physical realm and, therefore, not determined by external factors (Menges 3). Thus, the causal determinism of the twentieth century, which was primarily caused by political authority, might be congruent with libertarianism due to the developments in the compatibility theory and List’s account of libertarianism.
The determinism of the twentieth century formed as a result of various processes. The natural desire to analyze and compare all options has inspired humans to create different interpretations of the events in their lives (Willoughby et al. 136). As a result, causal determinism emerged and attempted to describe human existence and all its aspects. According to it, every moment has a particular cause and is governed by universal rules that people are not able to modify. In the twentieth century, E. Fromm proposed the idea that determinism may be connected to the authority and the state (Costello et al. 1). Fromm believed that humans naturally aspire to deny freedom under conditions that endanger their existence or the certainty in their lives. (qtd. in Costello et al. 2). In addition, technological advances allowed people to share their ideas freely and also achieve a more considerable influence. The state and the central parts of authority started using media as an instrument of propaganda. The administration aimed to increase obedience by using informational propaganda. Thus, people became more susceptible to information and the deterministic approach under conditions of constant political pressure. Consequently, the authority and political processes contributed to the increasing dominance of deterministic views.
As opposed to determinism, libertarianism emphasized the possibility of free choices. One of its core concepts was the probability of certain acts having no correlation with incidents, politics, or the state (Pleasants 9). Researchers defined three distinct types of libertarianism to explain its purposes and postulates. First is the non-causal libertarianism, which states that the freedom of actions is not governed by any circumstances (Pleasants 10). The second agent-causal model suggested that the possibility of a free choice is caused directly by the performer of the action (Pleasants 10). Lastly, indeterministic libertarianism describes the process of examining the options under the conditions of an unstable environment (Pleasants 10). To explain the processes of indeterminism, Pleasants stated,
“Thus, an action would be indeterministically caused if the following counterfactual holds: were the circumstances leading up to that action to be repeated a number of times with every fact about the actor’s psychology and external environment remaining the same, sometimes the action would occur as it originally did and sometimes it would not” (11).
Libertarianism postulates functioned as an opposition to the deterministic approach and insisted that various parts of human existence are regulations dictated by voluntary decisions.
The contradiction between free will and determinism is most often depicted through a quadripartite model. In this system, the first element is free will which signifies independence of thoughts (Costello et al. 2). The second element, fatalistic determinism, proposes fate as the critical determiner of events in human life (Costello et al. 2). Next, scientific determinism claims that material aspects of life have more significant input (Costello et al. 2). Finally, the concept of unpredictability proposes the chaotic nature of events. It suggests that human life consists of parts that are difficult to predict, and therefore people have to rely on such concepts as luck and chance (Costello et al. 2). The quadripartite model served as a systematic division of the different ideas and emphasized their dissimilarity.
In the process of the debates between determinism and free will, originated a view that attempted to unify both perspectives and denied their incompatibility. The central proposition of compatibilism is a principle that specific actions simultaneously may be caused by the external factors or the agent (Pleasants 11). According to the defenders of the theory, the ideas of incompatibility arise from erroneously idolatrous images of causality (Pleasants 11). The images state that all forms of correlation between acts and external sources are supported by the factors of coercion, pressure, or restriction (Pleasants 11). However, a person may achieve a level of freedom in his actions even under the pressure of the environment. One of the ideas of such freedom is supported by the claim that at least minor choices are situated within the realm of the performer itself. One of such ideas suggested that a person always has a specific range of options at any given moment of time (Menges 2). Contrary to libertarianism and determinism, compatibilists provided arguments supporting the possibility of coexistence of the two opposing theories and attempted to unify them.
One of the supporters of the compatibility of predetermined incidents and free will was C. List. He proposed that the freedom of choice includes the availability of multiple courses of action, while the deterministic approach suggested only one physical option (qtd. in Menges 3). This idea allowed for further integration of the opposing theories because the availability of various choices naturally leads to only one physical action (Menges 3). Another result of such reasoning introduced the fact that human psychological desires may influence the physical realm (Menges 3). If such desires have a certain degree of influence on the environment, it may lead to the idea that some parts of physical determinism are not valid. As an example, human biological thirst causes psychological responses in conciseness and affects an individual’s thoughts (Menges 3). This process may also happen in reverse, and instead, thoughts may cause chemical reactions that would initiate physical transformations. Thus, List’s account of liberty contributed to the further investigation and provided a foundation for the potential coexistence of the theories of determinism and libertarianism.
Causal determinism formed as a result of attempts to explain human life in the era of technological advancements. Largely influenced by authority and politics, it was used as a tool to govern society’s reasoning and increase obedience. In contrast, libertarianism insists that some aspects of human existence are not controlled by the environment or other external factors. Then, the compatibility theory attempted to unify opposing views and present a unique explanation of the reality of choices. F. List’s ideas promoted the potential unification of the different approaches. Finally, as a result of compatibility theory contributions, the determinism and libertarianism theories may be considered interrelated.
Works Cited
Costello, Thomas H, et al. “‘Escape from Freedom’: Authoritarianism-Related Traits, Political Ideology, Personality, and Belief in Free Will/Determinism.” Journal of Research in Personality, 2019, pp. 1–57.
Menges, Leonhard. “Free Will, Determinism, and the Right Levels of Description.” Philosophical Explorations, vol. 25, no. 1, 2021, pp. 1-18.
Pleasants, Nigel. “Free Will, Determinism and the “Problem” of Structure and Agency in the Social Sciences.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences, vol. 49, no. 1, 2019, pp. 3-30.
Willoughby, Emily, et al. “Free Will, Determinism, and Intuitive Judgments about the Heritability of Behavior.” Behavior Genetics, vol. 49, no. 2, 2019, pp. 136-153.