Free will is a philosophical term for competence of the rational agents to make choices on the course of action from the existing varieties of choices at hand. Over a long period, many philosophers have debated on the exact meaning of the free will. Majority of the philosophers debate this question to e closely related to the concept of moral responsibility. Acting based on free will is to meet the metaphysical requirements of responsibility of one’s actions. However, the implication of the free will is not exhausted because of its connection to the moral responsibilities. In addition, the free will appears to have a relationship with an individual’s accomplishments, and the efforts of the creative work and praises, relating to the dignity and the autonomy of individuals on the values accorded to love and friendships (Tabensky, 2007). Most of the philosophers who differentiate between the freedom of their action and free will to do that basing on achievement of success, depends on factors above the control of human. On the other hand, there are other external constraints on options which can be meaningful to be undertaken as the absence or the presence these conditions are not the responsibility of the person as it is the responsibility of the choices made. Free will is a subset of the willing as a conceptual matter. However, not all the philosophers agree with these claims. For instance, Rene Descartes identifies the faculty of will with the existence of the freedom of choice. He declares that the free will in its nature is so free that it cannot be constraint. On the other hand, the majority view is that the free will can easily be conceived, and much of the debate centered on the implications of the free will.
Free Will and Moral Responsibility
The major characteristic of the free will is related to the two most influential philosophical issues, which are the freedom of action and the moral responsibility. However, although there is a close connection between the two concepts, it is vital not to conflate them. It is widely acceptable that there is a clear distinction between moral responsibility and the cause for action. Depending on account of an individual’s action, someone may be morally responsible for actions if they are the cause of the damage. In this case, an individual is responsible for their actions should they become appropriate recipient for the moral blame or even praise. There is a close relationship between the existence of the free will and the moral responsibility (Tabensky, 2007). This is because if an individual does not have a free will, then they will not be morally responsible for their actions.
Arguably, that determinism is in conflict with the chief moral notions and the convictions of human kind. Duties and the moral obligations, as well as the responsibilities such as merit and justices, indicate that human kinds are the real masters of their actions. It also implies this humankind has self-determination. Therefore, not all their choices are the outcomes resulting from circumstances. When an individual says that they ought not to have committed some of their actions it is their responsibility to have obeyed the laws regarding these actions. When a person is held for their crimes, or that they truly deserve praises or even reward it means that the individual had the power and the choices not to have or to perform the acts. Individuals suffering from mental disorders are exempted from the judgment of their actions based on the free will. This is because they are devoid of moral freedom and thus free from moral responsibility. Just like the mentally insane persons, the children are also not held morally responsible as they are devoid of moral freedom and they make choices without prior arranged motives.
The psychologist argument dictates that the consciousness within humans defines the moral responsibility and freedom of actions. In the cases of actions that an individual has a distinct consciousness of making choices between the alternatives, and perceives it as the right thing to do, it is impossible not to confine their actions to their choices. The force of evidence is realized by carefully studying the different mental activities, which involves exercising freedom (Sommers, 2012). Amongst these actions are the voluntary attention and the sustained resistance to temptations. It is possible for an individual to be aware of their deeds and how they do the different actions depending on the mode of action. The consciousness within the human nature testifies that motives and the strong resistance to drift to the side of one’s choices freely and actively control all individuals. Most of the choices made by humans are determined by the environment, which influences the reflex actions influencing their acquired habits. Moral freedom like all the other mental powers is strengthened through exercise, with the effort of yielding self-control. The tendency of inhibiting human desires and concentration on more righteous deeds increases the habitual performance of the good deeds. Therefore, it is essential to foster moral liberty regarded as one of the noblest attributes of mankind. This is because even the scientist were able to identify the causes for all the actions committed by human beings, yet up to date they still speculate if the free will be able to threaten the foundations of the moral and legal systems.
It is often perceived that the free action of the human beings is the actions that they do because of the free will. One of the main characteristic of the free will is the free action as a person makes a decision before taking actions. For example if we make assumptions that these actions are those actions resulting from the rationale abilities, then the possibilities of the free action is dependent on the possibilities of the free will and thus successfully carrying out freedom of making choices. Different philosophers have different views because of moral responsibility of one’s actions. For instance, Thomas Hobbes suggested that freedom only exist when an individual is given the chance to do what the choices in the absence of the external impediments (Libet, et al., 2011). On the other hand, David Hume suggested that the liberty of the free will comes with the power of acting from the determination of the will, meaning that freedom is the capability to choose the course of action.
Free will is the capability of selection of the course of actions as the mechanism of fulfilling some desires. For instance, philosophers have occasionally distinguished the animal and the rational part of the human nature. The human nature implies a greater part of psychological complexity. The rational nature includes the ability to choose between what is right and what is wrong, and the values needing satisfaction even if they seem unpleasant for the human nature. Such judgments need not be based on the moral values, and most of the individuals act on free will when acting upon considered judgments on what is right whether judging it from animal’s point of view. For instance, people who commit an immorally act should be made responsible for their actions. Some philosophers do not believe that a free will is needed for moral responsibility. John Fischer suggested that human beings do not have the free will yet they are still morally responsible for their actions. According to him, the nature of the control needed for moral responsibility is weaker compared to the nature of control needed for the free will. In addition, this philosopher thinks that the truth for the causal of moral responsibility precedes the control required for the free will and it does not preclude the control needed for moral responsibility. However, many other philosophers think that the importance of the free will has no limitation to the necessity for exercising of free actions and moral responsibility.
In conclusion, moral implication of the problem of free will is determined by the choices made, through a conscious mind. All people have a conscience, and; therefore, the choices made depend on t whether an individual has a fee will or not. This attributed to the fact that free will is a subset of the willing as a conceptual matter. Duties and the moral obligations, as well as the responsibilities, such as merit and justices indicate that human kinds are the real masters of their actions. It also implies this humankind has self-determination. Furthermore, moral freedom like all the other mental powers is strengthened through exercise, with the effort of yielding self-control. The tendency of inhibiting human desires and concentration on more favorable deeds increases the habitual performance of the good deeds.