TSR Wiki > Study Help > Subjects and Revision > Revision Notes > Philosophy > Hume's An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding
Free Will and Determinism
- One objection to a scientific study of human beings is that human beings do not act according to such laws because we have free will
Libertarians - believe in free will and believe that we have the ability to divert the otherwise inevitable course of events
Determinists - believe that all events and actions are caused, including acts of will
- Against determinism are the facts that it seems to remove the idea of responsibility for our actions
- We make choices and think about what we are going to do, we live as though we have free will so it seems unlikely that we don’t
- Hume believed that he could reconcile determinism and free will and argued for what is called ompatibilism
- We are determined because we cannot escape the chain of cause and effect, so one action will produce another, however we will always do whatever we are most inclined to do
- We are free because we are able to do what we like however there are consequences of our actions
- I am free so long as I am able to do what I will
- Rewards and punishments would only be useful if they are capable of causing changes in human behaviour, if we are part of the chain of cause and effect
- Hume therefore believes determinism is compatible with free will
- Free will is incompatible with indeterminism, if your actions are not determined by what events came before then they are completely random and not determined by your character
- Free will seems to require determinism because otherwise the agent and the action wouldn’t be connected in the way required of freely chosen actions
- An act is free when the agent is responsible and accepts responsibility, also when it is performed in the absence of constraint or compulsion and is not the result of chance or accident
Liberty and Necessity
- Hume believes that longstanding philosophical disputes may be resolved by the clarification of the key terms
- In the free will debate the terms in question are liberty and necessity
- Necessity is analysed in terms of regularity, constant conjunction
- The same regularity is present in the operation of bodies and the voluntary acts of men, we just feel differently about the latter
- This feeling however carries no implication for there being any real difference
- Liberty is seen as a power of acting or not acting according to the determinations of the will
- Free actions are not subject to constraint
- Freedom is distinguished from randomness
- An action can be free and necessary therefore they are compatible
Objections: Liberty and Necessity
- Hume’s analysis of a free action is inadequate. He seems to be saying that no other action would have been possible in the given circumstances
- Hume’s account of necessity in terms of regularity might be questioned. If there are counter-examples then it is inadequate as an account of what we mean by necessary
- Hume’s account of liberty can also be questioned. The absence of a felt constraint is not sufficient to describe an act as free e.g. drug induced states. How do we know when unfelt constraints are operating?
- A distinction needs to be made between reasons and causes. Even if both result in regularity it does not follow that regularity is all we mean when we talk in these different terms.
- If there are no real differences between the operations of bodies and the voluntary acts of men can Hume explain why we should feel differently about them?
- The claim that all necessary connections are regular does not imply that all regularities are necessary
- Hume’s account omits the most important feature of liberty, namely the power of acting differently in the same circumstances
- Hume’s account does not accommodate what we mean by moral responsibility
Comments
These notes are aimed at people studying Hume's An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, but will be suitable for other people too.
Originally written by kissekate on TSR Forums.
