Free Will vs Determinism

This is entirely separate from fate, as neither doctrines declare the existence of such a thing, and hence would not fit correctly in the same thread.

I've had deterministic thoughts before, and have looked it up before, but never have my beliefs in it become so firm until I began research on John B. Watson for my psychology term paper. For those unaware, determinism is the belief that every event is simply the cause of a chain of circumstances, including both inherent biological traits and external social traits.

My main problem with the idea of "free will" is that it can be used (and often is) as a precedent for one person claiming a sort of moral high ground. Imagine two people on separate hemispheres of the earth. Bob, the first guy, shares the exact same series of external social influences as Ted, the second guy. They have led the exact same life, until they both find themselves in an iffy position: they just walked in on their respective wives screwing their respective best friends. Bob, on one hand, keeps his cool, and gets a divorce somewhere down the road. Ted, on the other, looses it and kills both his wife and best friend.

With me so far?

Bob might claim that his "free will" led him to make the better choice, and that he is a more moral person than Ted. But think critically; what is free will in this case but an innate psychological factor? Bob's brain functioned in a manner as to avoid flipping out, but Ted's didn't. It's no better than saying "my free will is better than yours." It's something Bob was born with that Ted wasn't. How can Bob claim his moral superiority without exercising the same beliefs that racists, sexists, and the other -ists do?

And, the more important question - how can we execute Ted for his actions? How can we kill a person for being born with a brain that chose to tick a certain way? How can we abandon all hope for psychologically reshaping him in a facility in which he could present no harm to anybody, and just end his life?

Please don't bump your own threads if someone has a reply they will post.

I don't really believe in free will, but when discussing things that are fairly irrelevent I'd probably use the term. I've asked myself those questions before though, and I could never really think of a practical answer.

quote RpgActioN

Bob might claim that his "free will" led him to make the better choice, and that he is a more moral person than Ted. But think critically; what is free will in this case but an innate psychological factor? Bob's brain functioned in a manner as to avoid flipping out, but Ted's didn't. It's no better than saying "my free will is better than yours." It's something Bob was born with that Ted wasn't. How can Bob claim his moral superiority without exercising the same beliefs that racists, sexists, and the other -ists do?

Ted killed someone, Bob didn't. He has every right to claim superior morality.

quote RpgActioN

And, the more important question - how can we execute Ted for his actions? How can we kill a person for being born with a brain that chose to tick a certain way? How can we abandon all hope for psychologically reshaping him in a facility in which he could present no harm to anybody, and just end his life?

Do you believe that no one should be held accountable for their actions?

Stehphen Hawking's essay "Is Evrything Determined?" provides a certainly interesting view on the matter.

§-

Absolutely. We are infinitely cmplex calculators and computers. Many people would not see it this way, but what else are we?

And one must grasp the concept that we are, after all, controlled by nothing more than a writhing mass inside out heads.

A hunch or a gut feeling is just a thought. Why do you class it differently than anything else?

I live in Texas - we lead the execution rates in the United States.

I never disputed the fact that people can reason and change based on experience. But reasoning doesn't happen spontaneously. Something has to cause it. Some people aren't given a brain that has a tendency to do so based on certain social influences, and some people aren't given the social influences that would lead most people to conclude that one "knows better."