Free will vs Determinism

• Humanistic approach to Free Will (Maslow, Rogers)

  All human behaviour is affected by our subjective experience and individual choices and these are the only factors that shape our behaviour. The humanistic approach states that as all humans are qualitatively different, they can only be understood on an individual level. Therefore, according to the humanistic approach, human behaviour is self-determined meaning we have free will and radical humanists argue for free will, where each individual has the power to make choices about their behaviour or actions.
• Moral Responsibility (free will), Cognitive approach


  All human behaviour is affected by our subjective experience (self-determined) and individual choices and these are the only factors that shape our behaviour. Individual choices and free will are based on the principle of moral responsibility, an individual is in charge of their own actions and choices to engage in behaviours that are morally acceptable. Society is also based on moral responsibility where humans are accountable for their own actions, also society requires free will as if we reject it, society would break down.
• Scientific Determinism (all experimental psychology)


  All human behaviour has a cause and effect. This means that predictions about behaviour can be objectively tested by manipulating the IV to observe its effect upon the DV. Therefore, all of psychology is based upon scientific determinism: if we reject determinist, we must also reject psychology itself. Therefore, according to experimental psychology, human behaviour is scientifically determined and we have no free will.
• Biological Determinism


  All human behaviour is caused by internal bodily activity and these are the only factors that shape our behaviour including:

  • Genetic factors
  • Brain organisation (Structural differences)
  • Neurochemistry (chemical levels)
  • Evolution

  Therefore, according to the biological approach, human behaviour is biologically determined and we have no free will. Radical biologists argue for hard determinism, where we have absolutely no choice over our behaviour or actions.
• Environmental determinist (Behavioural approach)


  All human behaviour is caused by external environmental experiences and these are the only factors that shape our behaviour including; learning, upbringing, school, peers and family. Humans are born a blank slate, meaning we have no predisposed abilities or talents therefore, all human behaviour is learned from environmental experience via: Classical conditioning, operant conditioning and Social learning theory. Therefore, according to the behavioural approach, human behaviour is behaviourally determined and we have no free will.
• Psychic determinism (Psychodynamic approach)

  All human behaviour is caused by unconscious instincts, drives and unresolved conflicts from childhood and these are the only factors that shape behaviour including: Successful completing of the Psycho-sexual stages of development, Distribution of the libido through the interaction of the:

  • Id (pleasure principle)
  • Ego (rationality)
  • Superego (morality)

  Therefore, according to the psychodynamic approach, human behaviour is determined by a mix of innate unconscious drives and early experiences and we have no free will.
• Hard determinism


  Implies that free will is not possible as our behaviour is always caused by internal or external events beyond our control. The biological approach argues that human behaviour is controlled by internal body processes and nothing else. The behavioural approach argues that all behaviour is a result of past experiences that have been conditioned.
• Soft determinism


  Whilst acknowledging that all human action has a cause, soft determinists argue that people have some conscious control over the way they behave. The cognitive approach argues that schemas are innate, everyone has the ability of creating them and our behaviour is determined by our experiences. However, we are free to think before responding to a stimulus. Social Learning theory argues that we are influenced by our external environmental e.g. role models but we have a choice over which behaviours we replicate.
• Strength of Free will

  Positive implications for society, in that it can lead to good mental health. This is because free-will 'gives the impression' that we are constantly making choices. Roberts found that people with an internal locus of control tent to have better mental health compared to those with an external locus of control, who were more likely to develop depression. This means that free-will has implications for society as it may lead to positive mental health, even is its just an illusion.
• Limitation of Determinism


  Negative implications for society as it could provide an excuse for immoral behaviour. For example, Stephen Mobley killed a pizza shop manager in 1981 and claimed that he was 'born to kill' due to a history of violence in his family. He argued that his behaviour was determined by his genes and therefore had no free-will. This means that an argument for hard determinism has implications for society as it may lead to issues of criminal responsibility.
• Interactionist approach


  This is when both sides of the debates are considered equally as important e.g. both free will and determinism. Bandura argues that although environmental factors in learning are key, we are free to choose who or what to attend to and when to perform certain behaviours. This suggests that all explanations of behaviour should consider that importance of the interaction between free will and determinism as they cannot easily be separated.