Free will and determinism

remember_updated_for_2008-20091_12 first_paper_assignment_summer_ii_20091_2

PLEASE INCLUDE A TITLE PAGE AND THE OUTLINE OF THE PAPER WHEN FINISHED 1. 1. Select and briefly define one of the three positions on free will and determinism that we have discussed them in class: incompatibilist determinism, incompatibilist libertarianism (also known simply as libertarianism), or compatibilism. **I PICKED COMPATIBLISM** 2. In the same introduction that includes the defined position, announce your intention to defend that position and say what the basis or key concept of your argument (e.g., dualist interactionism) will be. 3. Summarize your argument, listing each of its two or three premises. 4. Defend each premise in a paragraph of its own. 5. Consider an objection to your argument that might be raised by another well-meaning, philosophically-minded person, who has a different view on this issue or at least who sincerely doubts that you’ve successfully made your case for your own view. 6. Answer the objection as best you can. 7. Offer a final comment about your current thinking on this philosophical issue. CLASS NOTES USED: DEFINITION OF FREE WILL: a power to do or to have done other wise..PEOPLE SOMETIMES ACT FREELY. DEFINITION OF DETERMINISM: the view that every event has a cause and an effect. *COMPATIBLIST BELIEVE IN BOTH* you will be deffendiing the compatiblist view point. … you can use stepen hawkings as an example of free will or people who are brought up in a bad enviroment such as having to deal with drug addict parents and who chose the other path and actually become someone in life. maybe you could include the big bang theory for determinism and the catholic religion as another example.. just some suggestions.. GOOD LUCK and I will be sending editional info, such as instruction

Philosophy

AY 2008-2009

Dr. David Prentiss

Some things to remember when writing papers

A. Format

1. Number all pages, using the Insert feature or its equivalent; do not put the page numbers in by hand. Number the outline file with “i”, “ii’, etc., at the top of the page. For the body of the paper, use ordinary numerals, placing them top center, top right, bottom center, or bottom right. You may omit the number on the first page of the body of the paper, but the second page will have the number “2” (or “-2-“, as you prefer) in any case.

2. In the outline, a section A must be followed by a section B, a section 1 followed by a section 2, etc.

3. Using standard line and letter spacing. Avoid skipping extra lines between paragraphs.

4. A quoted passage of more than two lines is set apart, without quotation marks, as in this example:

Well she was just seventeen,

You know what I mean,

And the way she looked was way beyond compare.

So how could I dance with another

When I saw her standing there?

5. A number indicating a footnote or endnote should either be superscript, as in the cases on this page, or in parentheses. Either way, the number
follows all punctuation
.

6. Notes must be complete, but shortcuts may be used for similar notes that appear on the same page.

B. Paragraph and sentence structure

1. Construct simple, straightforward, grammatical, and syntactically correct sentences.

2. Avoid non-sentences, such as “This being the main problem.”

3. A paragraph is composed of two or more related sentences.

4. Remember to include terms such as “that” (e.g., “I believe that such-and-such is true.”) and “in order” (e.g., “It can be permissible to do a bad thing in order to accomplish a greater good.”) when they are needed.

5. Make sure that your sentences unambiguously bring out the proper relationship between the subject and the verbs. An example of what not to do is this: “When discussing free will and determinism, many difficulties arise.” This makes it sound as if the difficulties are having a discussion, during which they arise! One right way in which to formulate the idea in question is as follows: “When we discuss (or, whenever we are discussing) free will and determinism, many difficulties arise.” Another right way is this: “When discussing free will and determinism, we encounter many difficulties.”

C. Grammar

1. Avoid using plural words (“they,” “them,” etc.) as singulars; use one pronoun for a while and then use another, or use “he or she,” “his or her,” etc., or use “one,” “one’s,” and so on.

2. It is still considered unacceptable in most cases to end a sentence with a preposition (“to”, “of”, “with”, etc.). The rule against it is somewhat arbitrary, but try not to do it too often.

3. Make sure that your nouns agree with your verbs, e.g., “she believes,” “people know,” “you and I are,” etc.

4. Keep your verb tenses consistent within a paragraph, except when you have a very good reason to change them.

5. Learn to use the subjunctive mood correctly, as in the sentence, “If I were a carpenter, and you were a lady, would you marry me anyway?”

D. Punctuation

1. Use quotation marks around a word, phrase, etc., only when mentioning it (as opposed to using it; see Part I, item 7), quoting it (and not setting it apart), or using it in a non-literal sense.

2. Remember to close off a set of parentheses before punctuating a sentence (as in this case).

3. Remember to use a semicolon (“;”) only to separate two complete thoughts; its use should not be confused with that of the comma, which is followed either by a linking word such as “and” or by an incomplete thought, as in this sentence, or by both.

4. Avoid nesting your key points inside parentheses (which are usually reserved for expanding on or clarifying a point, as in this case).

E. Vocabulary, diction, and spelling

1. Use only those words whose meanings you know and understand; keep the dictionary

close at hand, and use it even when you think that you are probably using the word correctly.

2. Watch your spelling; again, keep the dictionary handy, and use it even in borderline cases.

At the very least, use the spell-check function on your computer!

3. In general, simply avoid the words “you,” “yours,” etc.

4. Know when to use “e.g.,” meaning “for example”, and “i.e.,” meaning “that is,” respectively.

5. Learn when to use “affect” and “effect,” respectively. For example, “You affect me in a good way” means “You have a good effect on me,” while “The new policy will effect a change” means “The new policy will bring about a change.”

6. Avoid using the word “hopefully” when what you mean is, for example, “one hopes that…”

7. Do not say that you, or that someone else might, disagree with the fact that such-and-such is true, since disagreeing with what one believes is a fact is irrational. Rather, say that you disagree with the claim, whatever it is.

8. Avoid such non-words as “irregardless.”

9. Say that the reason that something occurs is that something else occurs (not because something else occurs).

F. Content and Style

1.
Avoid even unintended plagiarism as you would avoid a toxic entity (which indeed it is!).
Cite all borrowed thoughts and passages, even when you put them in your own words. Also, cite borrowed terms, formulations, and turns of phrase, even when using them to express your own ideas. Use quotation marks, not just a citation symbol, when you are using the exact words of your source. Quote accurately!

2. Avoid such well-intended but philosophically unsound locution as “man” or “mankind” rather than “humanity”, “people”, “persons”, etc.

3. Avoid abusive, biased, demeaning, and/or similarly undesirable expressions. Also, avoid obscene, profane, and vulgar language except where it is absolutely necessary, which is rare.

4. Avoid slang, and when you must use colloquialisms, use them correctly; for example, one expression that people often misuse is actually “cut and dried.” Remember also to try to avoid cliches. If you must use a metaphor, make sure that you mean it metaphorically, and avoid mixing it with other metaphors.

5. When moving on to something new, begin with a transition phrase such as, “It might be objected that…” Also, introduce quoted or cited passages with a phrase such as “Smudge points out that…” Begin a discussion of a hypothetical with a phrase like “Suppose that…”

6. Avoid long quoted passages.

7. It is generally preferable to use the active voice (Good thing: “In this paper I shall argue that…”) rather than the passive voice (Less desirable thing: “In this paper it will be argued that…”).

8. It is perfectly acceptable, indeed preferable, to use the first person when the opportunity arises than to avoid using it. Write about what you will do, and not what the paper will do.

9. Write that you or others believe that something is the case, not that you or others feel it to be the case.

10. Avoid contractions (“don’t”, “can’t”, “isn’t”, etc.). Also, while many writers believe that it is perfectly acceptable to split an infinitive (e.g., “to boldly go where no one has gone before”), try not to overdo it; some split infinitives look bad and sound worse.

11. Avoid questions, including rhetorical questions, except when they are absolutely necessary (which is rare).

12. Eschew repetitiveness. (Notice that I did not use the word “avoid” this time!) Also, resist extraneous material. When you have run out of useful things to say, stop!

13. Avoid breaking words off with hyphens; get the entire word onto one line.

14. Before submitting the final draft, use all available word processing aids: spell check,

grammar, and so on.

15. Have fun writing your papers, while remaining disciplined in the writing and the arguments. And again, be original.

G. Terms, Propositions, and Arguments

1. Keep your sentences clear and unambiguous.

2. Define your terms when necessary. Also, avoid expressions that are vague, or worse, meaningless, such as “a higher plane.”

3. Construct good, logical arguments, with plausible premises. State openly any premise that could not reasonably be regarded as obvious or as true by definition (and sometimes even premises of these sorts should be stated as well).

4. Defend each premise of your argument, even if a premise appears to be obviously true.

5. Consider interesting objections to your argument(s), even if you lack fully

satisfactory answers to the objections.

6. Answer as best you can all objections that you consider.

7. When mentioning, i.e., writing about a word or term, rather than using the word

or term, place it in quotation marks. For example, if you are discussing love, you do not need quotation marks, but if you are discussing the word “love” you do need quotation marks.

8. Avoid using metaphors unless you intend (and you believe that it is absolutely necessary) to speak metaphorically; indeed, generally avoid using metaphors and other figurative devices.

9. Concentrate your efforts on one issue, and make certain that it is an issue that you are supposed to be discussing, even if you would rather be discussing something else. Also, remain focused throughout the discussion, and avoid bringing in irrelevant points, however interesting they may seem to be.

10. Be original, both in the way in which you formulate and the way in which you illustrate your arguments.

11. Make only those factual claims that you can verify if called upon to do so; better still, provide verification as you go along.

12. Avoid trying to sound profound; doing good philosophy requires keeping the discussion plain and simple.

13. When spreading the metaphorical fertilizer, make sure that it will cause something to grow.

First Paper:

A Problem Concerning Responsibility

(Your name)

Athena Espinosa

(Course)

Philosophy 212-0001: Ethics

(Instructor’s name)

Dr. David Prentiss

(Due date)

October 10, 2009

SAMPLE COVER PAGE

Outline

I. Introduction

A. Background

1. Many people believe that moral responsibility involves the agent’s power to have done

something other than what he/she did

2. This idea has recently been challenged in the literature

B. My approach

1. I will defend this idea against the challenge that has been mounted against it

2. I will base my defense on the concept of what I call qualified actions

II. Argument

A. Summary and illustrating example

B. Defense of first premise, that moral responsibility entails freedom

C. Defense of second premise, that freedom entails the ability to have done otherwise

III. Objection: The case of the doctor in the locked room

IV. Reply: We must consider how an action is qualified

A. I grant that the doctor did not freely stay, even though he (or she) voluntarily stayed (as

in Locke’s example)

B. His (or her) free act was not the act of staying

C. What the doctor freely did was to stay willingly, since he stayed voluntarily.

It was his (or her) qualified action of staying willingly that was free.

V. Conclusion

A. Summary of paper

B. Final comment: Even in many cases in which there is only one thing that we can do,

we have options with respect to the way in which we do what we do

SAMPLE OUTLINE

i

Making an Argument

Your main task in a philosophy paper is to make an interesting argument for a position. The essential statement of your position thus becomes the conclusion of your argument. So if in your first paper for Phil. 200 or 262 you are taking the position of incompatibilist determinism, you need to give reasons for it. These reasons are the premises of your argument. Here’s an example of a paragraph summarizing an argument for incompatibilist determinism:

My argument is as follows. All human actions are products of heredity and environment. But this power of heredity and environment to determine our actions precludes genuine free action. Therefore, no person ever acts freely, and incompatibilist determinism is true.

In the preceding sample paragraph, the second sentence (“All human actions are products…”, etc.) is the first premise of the argument, while the sentence after that (“…this power of heredity and environment…”, etc.) is the second premise, and the statement after the word “therefore”, i.e. the very statement that you are trying to prove, is the conclusion. After summarizing the argument, you need to defend each of its premises separately. For example, in the next paragraph the writer might say:

My first premise is that all human actions are products of heredity and environment. In defense of this claim, let me point out that any action that we take will either be unconscious or the result of a process of deliberation. Now if the action is unconscious, then the person doing the action can only be responding to natural factors, and these are going to turn out to be matters of the actor’s heredity, i.e., what he or she was born with, and the actor’s environment: upbringing, life experiences, whatever is presently confronting her or him, and so on. Moreover, if the action is the result of a process of deliberation, the actor will intentionally fall back on those things that are supplied by heredity and environment, in order to make a decision. So either way, that is, whether the action is chosen consciously or unconsciously, the choice is determined by the actor’s heredity and environment.

Once you defend each of your premises, you must then consider an objection to at least one of them, assuming that there is nothing wrong with the form of the argument and that the argument does not commit any informal fallacy like equivocation, circular reasoning, hasty generalization, and so on. To continue:

I realize that there are those who will object to my argument. Many will undoubtedly deny my first premise, that all human actions are products of our heredity and environment. One could insist, for example, that while heredity and environment play a significant role in our decision making, they are not the only things that go into the process by means of which we choose our actions. Things like an independent faculty of judgement play a part in this as well. Or so a good number my opponents believe.

The preceding paragraph discusses the sort of objection that either an incompatibilist libertarian or a compatibilist could make. Having noticed and explained the objection, it is then up to the writer to come up with an answer for it:

While I find this objection interesting, and I respect the motivation that I think is behind it, the objection does not pose refute the original argument. As an incompatibilist determinist I can simply reply, for example, that any faculty of judgement that we may have is itself a product of our heredity and environment. So we find ourselves back where we were, with no genuine power of free will.

I hope that these sample paragraphs help you to see what you need to do in your papers and how you might go about doing it. Good luck!

� John Lennon and Paul McCartney, “I Saw Her Standing There”, 1963.

� Get the idea?

� Suppose for example that you are quoting from a reading in a textbook that contains many readings from different authors. Your first note must contain a lot of information, as this example:

1 A. J. Ayer, “Freedom and Necessity”, in Philosophical Essays (St. Martin’s Press, 1954), reprinted in

Joel Feinberg and Russ Shafer-Landau, eds., Reason and Responsibility, 12th ed. (Wadsworth, 2005), p. 408.

Subsequent references that follow shortly after the original note can be shortened considerably:

2 Ayer, in Feinberg, op.cit., p. 412.

Or even more simply:

2 Ayer, op.cit., p. 412.

Philosophy 262-02

Summer 2009

First paper assignment –

Free will and determinism

(First draft due Tuesday, July 7; final draft due Thursday, July 9)

In a paper of about four to six double-spaced pages, not counting cover page and outline, which are also required, please do the following:

1. Select and briefly define
one
of the three positions on free will and determinism that we have discussed them in class: incompatibilist determinism, incompatibilist libertarianism (also known simply as libertarianism), or compatibilism.

2. In the same introduction that includes the defined position, announce your intention to defend that position and say what the
basis or key concept of your argument (e.g., dualist interactionism) will be.

3. Summarize your argument, listing each of its two or three premises.

4. Defend each premise in a paragraph of its own.

5. Consider an objection to your argument that might be raised by another well-meaning, philosophically-minded person, who has a different view on this issue or at least who sincerely doubts that you’ve successfully made your case for your own view.

6. Answer the objection as best you can.

7. Offer a final comment about your current thinking on this philosophical issue.

Go get ‘em!