Determinism: Free or Not?

The question of freedom has been a topic in philosophy for a while now. There have been many discussions of what it actually means to be free and how we should go about deciding if we are or are not free. The results are still inconclusive leaving us to give our own opinions on the matter, but before I discuss whether or not I believe we are free, I must first define for you what I believe to be the meaning of freedom. Freedom is the ability to act on your own free will, and free will brings up the topic of determinism.
Determinism then means that our actions are ultimately decided by external forces, such as the laws of nature, and are not all our own. It is plausible for some philosophers to conclude that determinism is real because it helps us to possibly predict not only ours, but other people’s behaviors. Some even believe that determinism has no chance of not existing because of the preexisting laws of causation which is just another way of saying because of one thing, a different thing happens as a result. There are two sides regarding determinism and freedom, one being they exist in harmony (compatibilists), and one being that they cancel each other out (incompatibilists). I am a compatibilist. I say this because even though our actions are predisposed, they are this way because of our mental state. There is one outcome because of our beliefs, values, fears, interests and that in hand means that we cause each outcome. For example, imagine if there was a road and it looked as though it had a few paths branching off of the sides from far away, but when you got close you realized the paths were not actually connected to your own. According to compatibilism, it is normal to see those different possibilities, but there was really only one outcome, one path, to be considered because you would not have changed courses even if that choice was up to you. I see this ultimately as each of our own courses passing through our veins. Now to bring up the issue of whether or not determinism is actually true. …show more content…
In my opinion, I believe it is reasonable to conclude determinism as a fact. The basis for this comes up in a variety of ways and the most crucial example that I can think of is the sciences. When it comes to science, the point is to study the results of the natural world around us. We explain the events of studies, or experiments based on what happened prior to cause our ending results. This goes back to what I mentioned previously relating to the law of causation. There should be no argument to the idea that every cause has a reaction. And sometimes things can go unexplained and in science there is never an absolute answer, but we still accept laws and theories as being the best ideas to explain what is currently happening in the world around us at the moment. A philosopher that would readily agree with my position on this is Harry Frankfurt. He brings a new element to my argument because in one of his papers he talks about the incompatibilists argument of alternative possibilities. In this the main argument is that when given possibilities a person can choose an alternative than his or her own previous action. This is assuming that one choice is better than the other and that we even have a choice in the first place. So, bringing me to my next point is why I believe I can