Determinism and the Possibility of Morality

Zahoor H Baber

doi:10.32350/jitc.22.05

Abstract

The possibility of morality in a causally determined physical world engages philosophers in a serious debate. Many philosophers think that morality is not possible in a world where everything, including human actions, is determined by antecedent causal conditions. However, attempts to reconcile these apparently contradictory views have come forth. What emerges through the debate is that even if all human actions are causally determined, moral commitments are irreplaceable. Therefore, it is argued that causal determination of our thoughts and actions does not change the truth of morality. However, a morality involving determinism seems to rely heavily on the causal efficacy of moral judgments rather than the possibility of a free action. The deterministic morality focuses on human motivation as a cause and ignores the possibility of free choice. Moreover, a deterministic moralityis unable to account for the freedom of the will. However, in serious climate of opinion, morality essentially involves moral responsibility based on a free choice and action. Thus, philosophical attempts to reconcile determinism and morality under the assumption of irreplaceable human interpersonal attitudes seem not so convincing. This paper brings forth the philosophical arguments involved; centralizing on the contention that morality cannot be subsumed under determinism.

Highlights

Determinism is the thesis that all events in nature are caused by prior events in nature such that an uncaused event is impossible, including the mental and physical events involving human actions
In serious climate of opinion, morality essentially involves moral responsibility based on a free choice and action
All physical and mental occurrences are determined by prior causes such that in principle every occurrence is predictable by the knowledge of the antecedent causal conditions that determine the consequent state of affairs of the physical world

Summary

INTRODUCTION

Determinism is the thesis that all events in nature are caused by prior events in nature such that an uncaused event is impossible, including the mental and physical events involving human actions. All physical and mental occurrences are determined by prior causes such that in principle every occurrence is predictable by the knowledge of the antecedent causal conditions that determine the consequent state of affairs of the physical world This raises the question how morality is possible that relies on freedom of choice and action entailing moral responsibility in the human world. We expel the abnormal by taking him as an object of treatment rather than subject of normal human response This implies that Strawson presupposes that the normal has a conscious control over how he behaves or acts. Even if determinism is true, normal human response cannot be transformed into an objective attitude towards all On this point Strawson sees that determinism is irrelevant as a problem for deciding whether morality is possible or not. I will expound on Strawsonian stance further to show where it stands in the whole controversy of freedom and determinism

CONSCIOUS CONTROL AND FREEDOM

INCOHERENCE OF PESSIMISTS AND OPTIMISTS

CONCLUSION

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY