Compatibilism Case

In the reader's perspective, Stace's main emphasis is morality. He kept asking us, "If we have no freedom, are we able to do anything with it? Are we responsible of our own actions?" He's comparing two points of view, which are free will and determinism called compatibilism. Compatibilism is the comparison of belief between free will and determinism without the concept of evidence.

In the beginning, Stace believes that the morality depends on the human existence and the reality of free will. In the work of free will and determinism there is a verbal dispute. A verbal dispute is defined as the usage and meaning of "free will" as an everyday basis. An example, he used throughout the reading is Gandhi where he fasted without no one enforcing it to him. After this analogy, he makes us believe that the actions we choose to do are based upon our emotions, thoughts, wishes, and desires. The acts that are not done freely, then those acts are enforced on the person in the personal factors and conditions.

The main problem is determinism. Determinism involves that the person knows advance of his or her own actions with enough information. He discusses that free will is a component of moral responsibility and determinism. In everyday life, human beings are responsible for their own actions that are envisioned. Determinists say that genetics influence the personality and action because humans have no moral responsibility. They believe that behind every thought and action is anticipated where free will is an illusion and we are provoked based upon our ego and propitiousness. Our past experience will face our reality in the present and future. Determinism is the view of reality in the relationship of the cause and effect in every outcome.

Determinism equals naturalism and the view of appearance and language use. . Naturalism is the outcome of every event with a natural cause. In the other side, indeterminism is not similar. Compatabilism is not the compromise of two people, and it doesn't provide a little, limited or some free will. We are the ones who decide whether we are going to be free or not. I am truly arguing that determinist's claim that compatibilists have a different point of view of freedom of choice. Every decision-making is determined by the internal and external factors. These internal and external factors are the principle of effects in causes. In conclusion, distinctions of desirability and undesirability will determine whether the person is living free or not freely. The actions of being will always be in the desirability of fulfilling our own wishes and desires, and the gives you the moral responsibility of compatabilism.