The Free Will Debate: Libertarianism vs Determinism

A debate that is widely discussed in philosophy is the debate over free will. This debate centralizes on the question of what determines our actions: free will, external causes, or even both. The two most widely accepted sides to this debate identify themselves as determinists and libertarians. Determinism states that human beings lack free will, all of our actions are either caused by earlier psychological or physical effects; in other words, every single one of our actions are predetermined because we lack the ability to decide or change our actions. On the other hand, libertarianism states that human beings have moral responsibility because humans have spontaneous free will, which can be defined as the ability to control and alter your personal actions; thus, humans have the ability to alter their life. Libertarians also believe that some of our actions are determined through external causes; however, the majority of our actions are determined through our own choices or free will. In other, simpler words, libertarians believe our actions are determined by both external causes and free will.

            I personally side with the concept of libertarianism in the debate over free will. I believe that most of our actions are determined through free will; however, there are instances where our external environment causes us to act instinctually with no clear thought process or free will. I also believe that human beings naturally put a great deal of thought into their actions, in hopes of living a better and more successful life. I agree with the fact that we are constantly facing crossroads in life in which we have to make a personal decision; however, I do not believe that this decision is preplanned by any means, rather we make these decisions and actions through free will, and with a clear thought process. As stated prior, I also believe we occasionally act based on our external environment; these actions, unlike free will, have no thought process. An example of an action based on an external cause is when you are at the doctor’s office, and you get your reflexes checked. The doctor will gently knock on your knee, and it will jerk forward. You definitely did not think through the action of your leg moving beforehand, rather you just simply acted with no distinct thought process; therefore, your actions in this case were instinctual rather than on the basis of free will. I also believe that it is irrational to say that all of our actions are caused by external causes, or what determinists believe. In short, I believe that in most cases, we choose our actions through free will; however, there are times when external sources will impact some of our actions.

            In regards to explanatory breadth, I do believe libertarians have the upper hand. Libertarians are ultimately able to explain more types of human behavior than determinists because it addresses free will as well as external causes for actions.  Libertarians discuss how our actions can be determined through our own choices as well as a number of external sources, such as our environment and upbringing, rather than just focusing on either or. Determinists only focus on external causes for actions and they fail to address specific concepts, such as when human beings act out of free will and spontaneity. Libertarians are able to explain more complicated actions that human beings sometimes do; in other words, libertarians are able to explain spontaneous actions. I believe we have all acted spontaneous in the past in one-way or another. For example, if someone was to get up and walk across the room, turn around, and walk back; there is no clear reason for this action and no notable external cause. Libertarians would have an easy job explaining this type of action because they would state how this action is an example of free will. However, determinists would have a much tougher time since there is absolutely no external cause for this individual walking across the room and turning around. Therefore, libertarianism has more explanatory breadth because it encompasses actions that involve free will and spontaneity.  

            For the case of explanatory depth, libertarianism explains the cause of actions in greater detail than determinism does. As stated prior, libertarianism discusses external causes for actions as well as the concept of free will; determinism merely focuses on external causes. Libertarians are able to explain the causes for actions on a wider spectrum than that of determinism; thus, making libertarian’s explanations for actions more in-depth and detailed. With this being said, libertarians are able to explain the causes for human actions in greater detail. They use the basis of free will as well as external causes; whereas determinists merely focus on external causes. Therefore, libertarianism has more explanatory depth than determinism because it is able to use multiple explanations for human actions.

            Determinism has more simplicity than libertarianism does. Simply put, determinism only focuses on one cause for actions: external causes. Whereas libertarianism focuses on two causes for actions: external causes and free will. The fact that libertarianism has more parts than determinism does, makes it less simple. It is true that the more parts or assumptions a theory has, the more room there is for error. In the case of the free will debate, libertarianism holds more room for error considering the fact that it involves two parts instead of one, making it ultimately less simple than determinism.

            In terms of conservatism, libertarianism is more consistent with our current, common sense beliefs. Libertarianism focuses on the concept of science; in our modern day, scientific concepts are generally regarded as true and acceptable. It is true that some people who side with determinism do so out of religious reasons. They believe that God preplanned our lives, including our actions. Though I have no rational basis to say that this concept is false, most of our current, common sense beliefs in this day and age are based on science; even though many people do follow different religions and faiths, concepts founded in science are generally more widely accepted than concepts based on religion, especially today. This may be because we can actually prove scientific concepts through research, observation, and trail and error. On the other hand, it is much more of a tedious task to prove the truth behind religion. Therefore, libertarianism holds more conservatism because it is more aligned with the concept of science.  

            I personally find more truth in the concept of libertarianism. I believe it is irrational to say that human beings do not have free will. Human beings naturally put much thought into their actions, and occasionally act out of spontaneity as well as moral responsibility. I also believe than human beings act due to external causes as well. Thus, our actions are determined through our free will as well as our external environment.

1. Libertarianism and determinism are the most plausible explanations for the causes of human actions.

2. Libertarianism has more explanatory breadth, explanatory depth and conservatism. Determinism has more simplicity.

3. Therefore, libertarianism is the most plausible explanation for the cause of human actions.