“The Case against Free Will"
Recall: In the “The Case against Free Will” James Rachels makes important points about The Case against Free Will. The article illustrate several examples that shows our behavior most likely comes from our family or the environment we live in. After discussing all of their major claims and points, the authors conclude that there are two reasons to be concern about our freedom. One is that “we come equipped by nature with deep-seated desires that we can only resist with difficulty.” These desires can sometimes be irresistible so it is hard to see that their behavior is their fault. Secondly, they authors state, “We need an explanation for why some people, but not others, are able to resist the impulses that nature has given them.” Because we don’t know why someone does something and another person do not, brings us down to a matter of choice. Free will can have a small part in the way people act.
Summary: According to Rachel’s, we don’t just do things to do it, we do them because it is behavior that we constantly repeat and most likely get rewarded for. Also, they argue that any of us might behave badly of we were unlucky enough to be in the wrong circumstances. Lastly, they question whether people are just born bad. Referring back to Clarence Darrow, the authors state that “Darrow believed that Leopold and Leob were “born bad” because they were born without feelings as pity and sympathy,” in which they may agree. However, Anthropologist John Townsend writes, that humans are wired for certain behaviors and the behaviors will emerge whether we want them to or not…but that does not mean that we have to act on it.
Quotes: “We come equipped by nature with deep-seated desires that we can only resist with difficulty.” “We need an explanation for why some people, but not others, are able to resist the impulses that nature has given them.” “We are part of nature, and what happens inside our skins is subject to the same physical laws...