Freewill and Moral Responsibility Essay - 825 Words

Freewill and Moral Responsibility in Response to Galen Strawson's Basic Argument (Essay Sample) Content: Name: Instructor: Course: Date:Freewill and Moral Responsibility in Response to Galen Strawsons Basic ArgumentIntroductionThe main argument that Galen Strawson puts forward attempts to find the truth in that no agent can fulfill the demands for real moral responsibility. Strawsons argument assumes that if an agent is totally morally responsible for his or her actions, the agent also has to bear the responsibility of his or her reasons for doing those actions. In this regard, Strawson finds it impossible for an agent to be responsible for his or her reasons arguing that this action calls for an unending regress of totally responsible decisions for the agent to bear the responsibility of his or her reasons. The thesis statement governing this paper argues that, Galen Strawsons basic argument is hardly persuasive to individuals who oppose that an individuals reasons are the cause of the individuals action. In this regard, there is a high possibility that an agent can avoid the infinite regress threat especially in situations where two similar choices seem to explain each other. The paper will introduce the basic argument by which that Galen Strawson stands. An argument that opposes Strawsons argument will follow and the next section will object the arguments that oppose Strawsons argument. A conclusion that restates the thesis and one that sums up the whole argument in the paper will conclude the paper.Galen Strawsons Basic ArgumentStrawson argues that there is a moral responsibility and freewill is inexistent. Strawson claims that most issues that are debated by freewill are not to be resolved until there is proof of the non-existence moral responsibility and freewill. The first simple idea that Strawsons argument relies on is that to act freely is acting in a manner that one can be said to be totally morally responsible for his or her action. The second simple idea that forms the foundation of Strawsons argument is that, for a person to be tru ly morally responsible for his or her actions, a person must in turn prove to be truly responsible for the reasons that bring about the performance of that action. The rejection of freewill and moral responsibility by Strawson has roots from the second simple idea.Opposing Strawsons Basic ArgumentStrawsons basic argument is based on the notion that the reasons that an agent puts forward as his explanation for doing an action are the cause of the agent performing that action. Strawsons causal assumption motivates his rejection of self-determined and morally responsible actions. A doubt cast over the causal efficacy of the reasons of the agent into performing an action deems Strawsons argument as one that has been inefficiently supported.The main reason for opposing Strawsons argument is that it is only persuasive to people who believe that a persons reasons cause a persons actions. Strawsons argument is based on a causal link between a persons reasons and a persons reasons. On this r egard, one can argue that, the reasons are not to be regarded as causal. This argument loses the intuitive force upon which Strawsons argument is founded. Indeterminism can be defined against the notion that reasons explanations presuppose the causality of reasons. In simpler terms, one can discredit Strawsons reasons/actions determination (Strawson, 44). Reasons explanations capture motivation behind a persons action, the end that the agents targets to satisfy by doing a particular action. ObjectionsThe theory only accommodates LibertariansLibertarianism is main philosophical position that is related to freewill and determinism I the metaphysics domain. Libertarians argue that the free will is incompatible with determinism and that agents possess freewill rendering determinism as false. The libertarians are indeterminist based on the argument that agents have freewill. The papers main argument is equated to libertarians ideas where it hardly benefits compatibilists. Another reason as to why the main arguments only accommodate libertarians i...