“Soft determinists (compatibilists) maintain that we are free and determined at

the same time. Do you find this position possible. Give reasons for your answer.”

- Definition of compatibilism.

A first attempt at a compatibilist definition might be this:

1. An action is free if and only if it’s cause is internal to the agent rather than external to the
agent.

However, this clearly is not a successful definition, since an action can have internal causes and yet not
be free (for example, sneezing has internal causes but is not a free action). A second attempt might be:

2. An action is free if and only if it is caused by the agent's beliefs and desires.

– Compatibilism

Compatibilism, also known as "soft determinism" and most famously championed by Hume, is a
theory which holds that free will/libertarianism and determinism are compatible. Libertarianism is the
belief that human beings have complete free will while the other extreme is hard determinism – the
belief that there is no free will and that all events are the result of pure causation. According to Hume,
free will is a hypothetical ability to have chosen differently if one had been differently psychologically
disposed by some different beliefs or desires. Hume also maintains that free acts are caused by our
choices as determined by our beliefs, desires, and by our characters. While a decision making process
exists in Hume's determinism, this process is governed by a causal chain of events. For example, a
person may make the decision to support something, but that decision is determined by the conditions
that existed prior to the decision being made.
One incompatibilist position holds that "free will" refers to genuine (e.g. absolute, ultimate) alternate
possibilities for beliefs, desires or actions, and that such possibilities are absent from the compatibilist
definitions. In the absence of such possibilities, the belief that free will confers responsibility is held to
be false. However, one compatibilist counter-argument is that such absolute alternate possibilities could
only have random causes, which would actually diminish responsibility.
If an act is free, then its agent could have done something else (could have avoided doing this act). If
the act is unavoidable, then it is not free. Free actions must be avoidable but some acts are not
avoidable.

Problems of Compatibilism – The determinist arguments.

Evaluating - Comparisons and evaluation between the determinist arguments and those of
compatibilism.

Conclusion – answer question