Home
About
Methods
Studies
Themes


The Determinism vs. Freewill Debate

Determininsim
Freewill
Assumptions
The determinist approach assumes that every physical event is caused, and, since human behaviour is a physical event it follows that it too has causal factors.
If all events are caused, and we have perfect knowledge of the current state of the universe, it follows that subsequent event are entirely predictable.
Determinism, with its emphasis on causal factors is, therefore aligned with physical sciences, which aim to reveal those laws to provide prediction and control of the future.
The freewill approach assumes that humans are free to choose their behaviour, that they are essentially self-determining.
Freewill does not mean that behaviour does not have a cause, in the sense of being completely random, but assumes that influences (biological or environmental) can be refused at will.
William James in 1890 wrote that freewill is not freedom from causation, but freedom from coercion and constraint - if our actions are voluntary and in line with our conscious desired goals, then they are free.
Examples in Psychology
The majority of approaches in psychology take a fairly strict deterministic view of human behaviour:
Behaviourism - took and extreme environmental deterministic approach, arguing that learning from the environment 'writes upon the blank slate of our mind at birth' to cause our behaviour.  John Watson's belief that the deterministic laws of learning could predict and control the future were reflected in his claim that he could take any infant at random and turn them into any type of specialist that he might select.  Skinner argued that freewill is an illusion created by our complexity of learning.
Psychoanalysis - took the view of unconscious determinism - that our behaviour is controlled by forces of which we are unaware - the reasons for our actions are merely rationalised by our conscious minds.  Later psychoanalysts, such as Erikson, looked at more conscious ego processes than Freud did.
Biological - this took a deterministic approach to psychology in that it assumed that our genetics, brain structure, and biochemistry were the principle causal factors in our behaviour.
Humanistic psychologists, like Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow, advocate strongly for human freewill, arguing that we are able to direct our lives towards self-chosen goals.  The emphasis on freewill is most apparent in humanistic based therapies, where the terms client and facilitator are used to indicate the voluntary nature of the situation, and the idea that the individual has the power to solve their own problems through insight.  Humanistic therapies are usually non-directive. 
Cognitive Psychology appears to have adopted a soft determinism view considering problem solving and attentional mechanisms as the 'choosers' of thought and behaviour.  While it seems that we select what we pay attention to, these mechanisms operate with the parameters of their innate capabilities and our past experience (just as a computer cannot choose to do something it was not built or programmed for) e.g. 'perceptual set' suggests that we are not free to choose what we see.  However, language and meta cognitive abilities may allow humans to choose from among many possible influences (Johnson-Laird 1988).
For
The illusion of freewill is shattered very easily by mental disorders e.g. obsessive compulsives lose control of their thoughts and actions, depressive lose control of their emotions.  Psychoactive drugs, which can produce involuntary hallucinations and behaviour.
Determinism is one of the key assumptions of science - whose cause and effect laws have explained, predicted and controlled behaviour, in some areas, above the level by unaided common sense.
The majority of all psychologists, even those sympathetic to the idea of freewill, accept determinism to some degree.
Introspection upon our decisions, when many possible and equally desirable options are available, often seems to indicate free choice.  Subjective impressions should be considered.  Even if humans do not have freewill, the fact that they think they do has many implications for behaviour.  Rotter (1966) for example has proposed that individuals with an external locus of control, who feel that outside factors, e.g. chance control their lives, suffer more from the effects of stress than those who fell that they can influence situations, an internal locus of control.  Brehm (1966) argued people react if their freedom is threatened.
Against
Determinism is inconsistent with society's ideas of self-control and responsibility that underlie all our moral and legal assumptions.  Only extreme examples of determinism are taken into account, e.g. insanity.
Determinism can never lead to a complete prediction due to, the vast complexity of influences upon any behaviour, the nature of inductive thinking, that is, we can never prove determinism, and the notions of unpredictability, e.g. Heisenberg's 'uncertainty principle' and non-causality that physics has produced.
DEterminism is unfalsifiable since it always assumes a cause exists, even if it has not been found yet.
It is difficult to define what freewill is and what the 'self' that 'does the choosing' consists of.  Philosophers such as Descartes regarded it as a non-physical soul or spirit, while the existentialist philosopher, Sartre, preferred to think that freewill was a product of the consciousness.
The evidence for the existence of freewill is mostly subjective - where 'objective' studies have been conducted the results are a little disturbing - Libet (1985a) claims that the brain processes that initiates the movement of a hand occur almost half a second before the moment a subject reports choosing to move it.
A pure freewill approach is incompatible with the deterministic assumptions of science.


Designed by Tony:Powered by IONOS