Determinism vs Free Choice
...dney Hook, argue that “An individual cannot be held morally responsible for his choice if it could not have been other than it was”. While this is true, it can only be applied to a situation in which an outside agent forced a person to commit some act worthy of disapproval or punishment, in which case, that person would be excused because he had no choice in the matter; “it could not have been other than it was”. It was as though the outside agent itself had committed the act. In all other instances, however, a person is morally responsible for his actions because he is presented with options. There is an ability to choose between the choices presented to him. Inherent in this concept of choice is the existence of free will. When we are presented with a choice, we feel in that moment a sense of power. This is because we know we can choose either option. We know we are not being limited to one possibility. A determinist may argue to this point that what you choose can be predicted, through past decisions over such alternatives. For example, we choose one object over another many times because we have a preference for that object. We would prefer that specific choice over the others. It would therefore, be assumed that ones actions are determined by partiality. Using a fairly trivial example to make the argument simple and clear, let us assume that a person is partial to chocolate ice cream, and prefers it over the strawberry flavored variety. Given the choice between the two, one would claim that, following the determinist belief, that individual would choose the chocolate ice cream. Yet, how is it explained when that person opts for the strawberry ice cream, surprising those around him? By all reason, anyone on the outside would have expected a choice of chocolate. This is explained through the fact that a person has the freedom to choose between two such options that do not conflict with his upbringing or moral character. A person has the ability to choose a path that does not follow his pattern of past decisions. It illustrates the idea that, no matter what the antecedent causes, a person is free to choose any option available. This behavior could not have been predicted as his character or social behavior could have been. There is a tremendous difference between these two ideas, that of a momentary decision and those that show a repeated pattern due to a certain amount of brainwashing that is intrinsic in child-rearing. There must exist, in these momentary choices, the concept of free will or free action, and therefore, moral responsibility. Moral responsibility exists with respect to one’s actions. A rational person has an understanding of the notions of good and bad, or right and wrong, and has the freedom to choose between them. There can be no argument against the fact that that person should be held mora...