Free will v.s. determinism

• This debate aims to question whether we have conscious choice over our behaviour or whether it is determined by internal or external forces.
• Free will

  • Humans can make choices and are not determines by biological or external forces.
  • The humanistic approach advocates free will as they consider individuals to be self determining and free to choose their thoughts and actions. However, it does not completely dismiss internal or external forces.
• Determinism

  • Behaviour is controlled by internal or external forces rather than an individual's will.
  • The biological, environmental and psychodynamic approaches all have a different view of determinism.
• Hard determinism

  Implies that free will is not possible as behaviour is always caused by internal or external events that are beyond our control
• Soft determinism

  All events have causes but behaviour can be determined by our conscious choices in the absence of coercion. The cognitive approach is considered to advocate "soft determinism"
• Biological determinism

  Behaviour is caused by internal biological factors, e.g. genes, neurochemicals, brain structure and hormones. Examples include:

  • testosterone and aggression, leads to greater aggression
• Environmental determinism

  • Behaviour is caused by external forces in the environment, e.g. reinforcement and punishment.
  • e.g. Skinner believed that free will is an illusion. We may think that we are acting independently, but our behaviour has been shaped by socialisation from teachers, parents, etc.
  • Behaviourists believe all behaviour is determined from environmental influence.
• Psychic determinism

  • Unconscious forces and innate drives control behaviour. We are determined via our repressed childhood conflicts and innate drives, e.g. slips of the tongue can reveal true motives.
• Science + causal explanations

  • Scientific research is based on the view that all events have a cause
  • The researcher manipulates IV to see its effects on the DV and they control for extraneous variables. They do this isolate the causal variable.
  • Knowing cause helps scientists control and predict events in the future.
  • e.g. Harlow looked whether a monkey would form an attachment with a wire mother with milk or a cloth mother. The study showed that contact comfort determined the attachment, not food
• A03

  • Dennet argues that it is now acccepted in the physical sciences that there is no suchthing as determinism. Causal relationships are probalistic rather than deterministic. They increase the probability of things occuring rather than being the sole determinist.
• A03

  Evidence from twin studies shows that concordance rates in identical twins are never 100%. This shows that genes do not entirely determine our behaviour. As there are higher concordance rates for MZ twins, we can conclude that there is some genetic basis to the disorders, however, it is definitely not the sole factor.
• A03

  Approaches that have a cognitive element adopt a soft determinism position. For e.g. Bandura's learning theory suggests that there are environmental influences through role models. However, mediating processes mean an individual can decide who and what we attend to, and if we repeat a certain behaviour. An interactionist approach may therefore provide the best compromise in this debate.
• A03

  Libet criticises the idea of free will. The reason for this is that he recorded activity in the motor area of the brain before the person had conscious awareness to flex their wrist.

  The unconscious brain activity leading up to the conscious decision to move came half a second before the actual movement. This experiment offers evidence that there are some decisions that are first made up by the brain and suggest that the brain was in a readiness to act state rather than an intention to move.
• A03

  A limitation of determinism is the position of the legal system on responsibility. Determinism is inconsistent with the legal system as it says that choice is not always the cause of behaviour.

  Our legal system works on the basis of responsiblity.

  Deterministic views however, provide an excuse for undesirable behaviours.

  e.g. Mobley, who killed a Pizza manager in 1981 claimed that he was born to kill due to a history of violence in his family but his argument was rejected and he was sentenced to death.

  BUT there are more recent examples where genetic evidence has been able to be used to reduce sentences in serious violent crimes.
• A03

  Taking a strong determinist stance within mental illness can lead to certain treatments being favoured over others. In mental illness, a deterministic view of depression would lead to drug treatment to address chemical imbalance in the brain.

  Taking a strong biologically determined view of people can lead to social consequences. An example of this is intelligence testing. This viewpoint gives no role for free will and the determination that people can use to overcome difficulty and prosper in life. Instead, extreme advocates of hard determinism would write them off and limit opportunities for them in life.