Free Will Commentary: Soft Determinism and Hard

Free Will Commentary: Soft Determinism and Hard Determinism and the Application of Morality Free Will & Hard Determinism Free will is a concept that holds that all individuals are free to make their own choices about their lives including their own health care, career pursuit, religious and moral choices.

Within the realm of the discussion on free will is a concept known as hard determinism, which holds that if an action is required then it cannot be derived of free will and as well, holds the view that for any action there are causes that drive that action. Hard determinism holds that these drivers for action are inextricably linked to laws that are not personal and that are in the nature of mechanics.

Free will from this view is such that does not actually exist since it would mean that causal laws play no part in determining the actions of the individual. Free will is such that makes the personal responsible on a moral level for their actions. Free Will and Soft Determinism Soft determinism on the other hand holds that while there is a cause for everything that causes have little to do with free will. The view of soft determinism is that any voluntary act is a free act.

The thought of soft determinism is that both free will and the existence of causation on a universal level can exist compatibly. It is the view of the soft determinist that the individual oftentimes does not feel as though they are forced or compelled to act and that when they are not forced and rather act on a voluntary basis that the individual has acted out of free will.

The primary emphasis of the view of soft determinism is such that is placed on the voluntary nature of the act as compared to when the individual is coerced or forced to act. However, from the impartial point-of-view, if there are no other options available then the state of being free does not in exist after all.

Characteristics of Free Will Free will in ones' actions can be understood to be free will only if other viable options or choices exist to consider prior to making a decision concerning the individual's actions.

For example, when one is raised to believe a certain way and has no other influences upon their belief system then they may believe that they exist in a state of free will when in fact; they only act upon the notion of free will because they do not have knowledge or experience of any other options. Consider, if one will an individual who has always attended church on Sundays and worshiped in a certain congregation and who does not know that other congregations of religious beliefs exist.

Because of their lack of knowledge of the alternatives or options of religious beliefs and practices, the individual while appearing to act out of free will does not in fact do so because for free will to exist then individual must have other choices and must be aware of those potential choices. Therefore, choices, options, and the knowledge of those alternatives must exist in order for free will to exist.

Morality The application of morality differs from one culture to the other and from one set of belief systems to the other. Since the view of morality is such that depends on not only on who the individual attempting to apply morality is but as well depending n the personal, cultural, social, and religious belief systems of the specific individual or group. For example, that which would be considered morally correct in the United States would not necessarily be considered morally correct in an Arab nation and vice versa.

Therefore, to attempt to judge or to apply moral judgment upon another is difficult at best due to the differences in the beliefs of what is held as morality. Society holds that the individual progresses in the area of morality in terms of behavior and choices with maturity and experience. However, the question of morality is one that changes across cultural,, religious and social realms with a chasm many times existing between the view of what can be termed as moral or as being in the form of morality.

Immanuel Kant held that morality or that which is termed to be 'good' must necessarily be qualified as nothing can be held as inherently good or evil in and of itself. Morality must arise from something other than good intentions to do what is right but as well must stem from principles based on beliefs that have been processed cognitively and rationally and that represent the best possible actions and choices for the situation at hand combined with principles or best practices for living.

Any attempt to standardize morality across the board is simply an attempt at homogenization of a vast array of culture, religious, philosophical, and ethical belief systems and would be erroneous in its application at best. While some principles are universal, there are still others that are locally formulated and which do not adhere to universal principles and beliefs in the realm of the application of morality to living.

Ethical behavior or morality is not just concerning what the individual should do but as well concerns things that the individual should not do to remain in a moral and ethical state of existence.