Determinism vs Free Will

• Free will: The notion that humans can make choices and are not determined by biological or external forces.
• DETERMINISM: The view that an individual’s behaviour is shaped or controlled by internal or external forces rather than an individual’s will to do something
• PSYCHIC DETERMINISM: The belief that behaviour is caused by unconscious conflicts that we cannot control.
• BIOLOGICAL DETERMINISM: The belief that behaviour is caused by biological (genetic, hormonal, evolutionary) influences that we cannot control
• ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINISM: The belief that behaviour is caused by features of the environment (such as systems of reward and punishment) that we cannot control.
• HARD DETERMINISM: Implies that free will is not possible as our behaviour is always caused by internal and external events beyond our control
• SOFT DETERMINISM: All events, including human behaviour, have causes, but behaviour can also be determined by our conscious choices in the absence of coercion. In contrast with hard determinism.
• The biological approach emphasises the role of biological determinism in behaviour. The three main biological mechanisms are genetics, brain physiology and biochemistry. Many of your physiological and neurological processes are not under our conscious control - such as the influence of the autonomic nervous system during periods of stress and anxiety
• Lots of behaviours and characteristics, such as mental disorders, are thought to have a genetic basis and research has demonstrated the effect of hormones - such as the role of testosterone in aggressive behaviour.
• Evolution and genetics: no gene has been identified that means behaviour will definitely occur
• Twin studies have not shown 100% concordance in aggression and schizophrenia
• A girl who had a tumour in her limbic system was becoming increasingly violent, once the tumour was removed her aggression subsided, supporting hard determinism.
• However, determinism can be reduced through medication (which is your choice to take)
• BF Skinner described free will as ‘an illusion’ and argued that all behaviour is the result of conditioning. Our experience of choice is because of reinforcement that has acted upon us. We might think we are acting independently, but our behaviour has been shaped by environmental events, as well as agents of socialisation - parents, teachers etc.
• • Freud agreed that free will is like an illusion, but placed more emphasis on the influence of biological drives and instincts than behaviourists
  • His particular brand of determinism sees human behaviour as determined and directed by unconscious conflicts, repressed in childhood
  • There is no such thing as an accident, according to Freud, and even something as seemingly random or ‘slip of the tongue’ (parapraxes) can be explained by the underlying authority of the unconscious
• Dennett (2003) argues that, in physical sciences, it is now accepted that there is no such thing as total determinism. There is another theory called chaos theory - small changes in initial conditions can subsequently result in major changes (the butterfly effect).
• A strength of free will is its real life benefits to individuals’ mental health. Roberts et al (2000) studied adolescents who were strongly fatalist, which means they believe everything is decided for them by biological predisposition or factors outside of their control. They were found to have a significantly higher chance of developing depression in later life. This is a strength as it shows that, even if free will might be a limited and overly optimistic ideology, the simple belief in it can have long term, positive effects on people.
• A limitation of free will would be contradicting evidence from brain scans. Libet (1983) asked participants to flick their wrists while he measured precise activity in their brains. Participants had to say when they felt the conscious will to move - however, the unconscious brain activity came at around half a second before the conscious activity, suggesting that even our most mundane of actions might start off as impulse.
• However, a criticism of Libet’s study would be that its findings might not demonstrate determinism, but a different form of free will. Just because the conscious brain activity was read after the conscious action might only indicate that it took time for the brain to become conscious of the decision it had already made. This is a limitation of Libet’s study for ‘disproving’ free will as the way the evidence is read relies heavily on interpretation, making it subjective.
• A limitation of determinism would be its application in the real world. The courts see a crime as a ‘conscious’ act, but if genetics are explained as the root cause of criminality, then shade could be thrown over the prosecution process. Prosecution relies on the belief that criminals commit acts out of free will, but if we are to follow the hard determinist perspective, we could corrupt the validity and efficiency of the legal system. This is a limitation as the determinist approach is not likely to manifest in the courtrooms, reducing its real-life applicability.