Lucretius saw the randomness as enabling free will, even if he could not explain how beyond the fact that random swerves would break the causal chain of determinism.
"If all motion is always one long chain, and new motion arises out of the old in order invariable, and if first-beginnings do not make by swerving a beginning of motion so as to break the decrees of fate, whence comes this free will?"
The first major philosopher to argue convincingly for some was probably . First he described a causal chain back to a prime mover or first cause, and he elaborated the four possible causes (material, efficient, formal, and final). Aristotle's word for these causes was ἀιτία, which translates as causes in the sense of the multiple factors or explanations behind an event. Aristotle did not subscribe to the simplistic "every event has a (single) cause" idea that was to come later.
Recommended Reading:Richard Dedekind, , tr.
Very well. In a sense, Dennett’s is simply the standard modern account of how the mind relates to the physical order. The extravagant assertion that he adds to this account, however, is that consciousness itself, understood as a real dimension of wholly first-person phenomenal experience and intentional meaning, is itself only another “user-illusion.” That vast abyss between objective physical events and subjective qualitative experience that I mentioned above does not exist. Hence, that seemingly magical transition from the one to the other — whether a genetic or a structural shift — need not be explained, because it has never actually occurred.
Print versions available in , , , and .
In , the distinction between points out the difference between the intrinsic and the extrinsic properties of , and in, and disagree about whether the moral of human actions resides in their intrinsic or their extrinsic features.
Kyburg, Jr., (Minnesota, 1982);D.
John Locke liked the idea of Freedom and Liberty but was disturbed by the confusing debates about . He thought it was inappropriate to describe the Will itself as Free. The Will is a Determination. It is the Man who is Free. "I think the question is not proper, whether the will be free, but whether a man be free." "This way of talking, nevertheless, has prevailed, and, as I guess, produced great confusion."
Clarke, Jr., (Routledge, 1985);Robert B.
In his Practical Reason, Kant imagined two worlds (another ), the world of phenomena and a "noumenal" world of mind (nous) - a subtle variation on the realms of Plato's Ideas, the Scholastic and Renaissance idea of a God outside of time, and Descartes' Mind - in which Kant based rational belief in freedom, God, and immortality, as well as values.
Manktelow, (Routledge, 1990); and, ed.
1. This principle was easilyrefuted by appeal to the familiar brain-transplant thought experimentsso enjoyed by philosophers. If Tom and Dick switch brains, Tom is the fellowwith Dick's former body — just ask him; he'll claim to be Tom and tell youthe most intimate details of Tom's autobiography. It was clear enough, then,that my current body and I could part company, but not likely that I couldbe separated from my brain. The rule of thumb that emerged so plainly fromthe thought experiments was that in a brain-transplant operation, one wantedto be the not the recipient. Better to call such an operation a transplant, in fact. So perhaps the truth was,