Determinism

Determinism holds that every action and event is determined by prior causal factors. Embraced by thinkers such as Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900), Ted Honderich, and Peter Van Inwagen, so-called hard determinism holds that every event is the result of an unbroken causal chain. Thus, complete knowledge of the state of the universe at any given moment, combined with a complete knowledge of the laws of nature, will yield perfectly accurate predictions regarding the future state of the universe.

Determinists often point to modern science for justification. Fields such as genetics and molecular and developmental biology attribute an ever-increasing number of human physical and behavioral characteristics to their genetic makeup, a makeup that is “determined” by each individual's unique DNA composition and predates consciousness. For determinists, free will is a mere illusion, a construct of the human mind.

As a result, hard determinism has been the subject of continued criticism from those who see it as a direct attack on the notions of human freedom, independent choice, and voluntary action. Indeed, the main criticism of hard determinism is that the theory is fatal to ethics. If human agency is nothing but an unbroken chain of successive causal factors, the argument goes, there is no basis for individual responsibility and moral obligation.

The leading critics of hard determinism are libertarians. Although they accept that human action is often subject to various causal constraints and both internal and external pressures, libertarians reject the belief that human action is fully determined by prior causal factors. Such a belief is inherently flawed because it falls prey to the infinite regress critique. Instead, libertarians attribute human action to the exercise of individual will. It is no surprise, then, that libertarians reject causal determinism.

In response to these criticisms, a particular “soft” form of determinism emerged, known as “compatibilism.” As the name suggests, compatibilism attempts to reconcile free will with determinism to preserve the latter without destroying the philosophical foundation for ethics and moral action. The compatibilist idea of freedom is largely a pragmatic solution to the logical incompatibility of free will and determinism. Compatibilism approaches the problem of free will by redefining “freedom.” Compatibilists define freedom [Page 406]not as a metaphysical reality but, rather, as an agent's perception of her ability to choose her fate. Humans are “free,” compatibilists argue, insofar as they are consciously aware of alternative options and an opportunity to decide between them.

Compatibilism has been widely influential. Thinkers such as Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679), John Locke (1632–1704), David Hume (1711–1776), and, more recently, Harry Frankfurt have developed different versions of the theory. Though soft determinism may fall short of providing a philosophically satisfying resolution to the problem of free will, it continues to attract thinkers who wish to embrace causality but are unwilling to dispense with the liberal conceptions of voluntary choice, human agency, and moral responsibility.