Freedom of Will: A History of Theories

Abstract

By comparing the assumptions of human natureHuman Nature between the classical school of criminologyClassical School of Criminology and the positivist school of criminologyPositivist School of Criminology, we can find that the key to the differences in understanding human nature between the two schools lies in whether people have free willFree Will. The classical school assumes man as a rational person, thereby affirming man’s free will, while the positivist school of criminology assumes man as an experienced manExperienced Man, thereby denying man’s free willFree Will. Therefore, an in-depth investigation of the criminal law thinking of the classical school and the positivist school of criminologyPositivist School of Criminology is impossible to exclude the issue of free will. There is no doubt that free will is first and foremost a philosophical problem, but it is closely related to law, especially criminal law, and can be said to be a prerequisite basis for criminal law theories. Engels pointed out, “It is hard to deal with morality and law without coming up against the question of so-called free willFree Will, of man’s mental responsibility, of the relation between necessity and freedom.”