Determinism and Free Will Flashcards Preview

Philosophy Prelims > Determinism and Free Will > Flashcards

Flashcards in Determinism and Free Will Deck (11)
Loading flashcards...

Ayer Freedom and Neccessity

Free will doesn’t mean knowing that there are no constraints acting upon you or knowing why you are taking such actions; freedom is the opposite of constraint rather than causality. Freedom is present when one is not under constraint rather than when one is in possession of certain criteria. Hence the criteria for free (and non-random) action are (i) I should have acted otherwise if I had decided that way (ii) My action was voluntary in the way in which a Kleptomaniac’s actions are not (iii) nobody compelled me to choose as I did. determinism only states that events are factually correlated in some temporal-spacial relation and in this way references that events can be predicted. Importantly for free will determinism does not mean that your actions will be constrained.



There is only one conception of free will and most understand that we do have it. Problems of conflict with determinism have come from differences in use of language


Van in Wagen

Free will not true because we do not have the ability to do otherwise without rendering the laws of nature false (which is not possible)



Can be morally responsible even if you do not have the ability to do otherwise



Moral respnosibility is too intuitive to be unpicked by any theoretical philisophical standpoints. Instead whether we choose to withold reactive attitudes is decided on a case by case basis that cannot be retained for any long period of time. Even if determinism is true it is defunct with reference to moral responsibility


Ayer Knowledge

JTB account based on the right to be sure that p is true and gaining that right through "truth reliable" methods (Foster says that completely sure clause can be weakened without changing the whole argument)


Radford Knowledge by Examples

Tacit belief underlying knowledge. Example of person "guessing" the


Gettier JTB

justified true belief not constitute knowledge as can have based true belief on an inference that is false



Some gettier cases can be reworked to include NO basis of false evidence (the chairman told me that Jones will get the job) but this still rests on the intermediate step that you believe he will get the job.



Causal chains required for knowledge. But numbers cannot have causes and hence you face the regression of knowledge problem



Externalist theories of knowledge come up against the infinite regress problem (Goldman). Armstrong's theory allows people to be instruments for measuring knowledge but for the wrong reason. Many people form justified beliefs in a subjectivelly irresponsible manner (including under valid externalist clauses) Internalism may require too much of people but this means that we are simply using knowledge in the wrong sense in everyday life.