A Rhetorical Analysis Of Matt Ridley's Free Will

Determinism is a theory that all things in the world is governed by laws. This theory is based upon the materialist view of the body and mind. Materialists think that all things that exist in this world matter. We, humans, have mind or souls and desired interests are based upon actions. This principal argues that we have no moral responsibilities and choices. Actions are made by causes. We cannot predict everything in the future and with that said, human actions are made by laws.

Between the mid-late 1970s and the early 1980s, Dennis Nilsen began mass murdering young men in Great Britain that had at least 15 men through strangulation (Crime Investigation, 2014). In analyzing his life, many of contributions throughout his life could have influenced his criminal behaviour when committing his crimes. Many theories such as broken home hypothesis and schema therapy theory use psychological explanations that determine how the individual resulted into committing their crimes. With schema therapy theory, not only does it discuss the justification for criminal behaviour, but suggests how to reduce the relapse of criminal acts by identifying the cause or the trigger of the individual’s criminal behaviour (Vos et al., 2016). In Dennis Nilsen’s life, there are several indications such as the abandonment of his family members, the termination of a past relationship, and the reclusiveness from society that could have resulted

He describes how science is able to somewhat prove that free will is predetermined by showing an experiment where computer readings were able to predict a monkeys actions before the monkey even began the action. Experiments like this that are able to predict the future put free will to doubt. Egginton then describes how religion may counteract free will. God supposedly created humans with free will but if God’s ability is truly limitless, then he would not just know the past and present but also the future. With an omnipotent God, that knows the future, free will is again put to

Personally, I don’t agree with this school of thought in every situation. Take, for example, a mentally ill person who commits a crime as a result of that mental illness. His or her crime is no less a crime because of their illness or disability, but they are less culpable in my eyes because they may not have chosen that action or behavior. When you take into consideration determinism and free will, I don’t believe that either one is totally correct. Instead, it’s a mix of both. We make choices, which may or may not be influenced by other

Free will is a term unheard of nowhere days because of how much the media portrays that we have to do what other people say such as politicians. Some people are destined to think that everything we say and do has already been written out in a script somewhere in heaven and that God already knows what we are going to do before we even do it.

Failures and successes in life have led many people to believe that destiny plays a role in one's future life outcome. Some say destiny, the “hidden power believed to control what will happen in the future”, is unchangeable; fate has already decided how one will live their life. Although in some cases this may be true, one is able to change their destiny by the deeds and actions they commit during their lifetime.

choices lead to their predetermined destinies. Free will controls most of the actions within the

One of the most debated topics throughout the world is nature versus nurture. When psychologists debate this topic, they are studying what influences a person’s personal development. Some say that a person’s nature influences personal development while others say a person’s nurture influences personal development. A lot of people spend time contemplating which one actually does the influencing but what some do not realize is that, perhaps, both nature and nurture help shape a person’s personal development. One topic that comes up quite often is whether or not a person is born a criminal. Today, there are proven facts that people who have parents that are criminals have a high chance of becoming criminals themselves. Not only can people become criminals because of their family but they can also become criminals because of the environment that they surround themselves in. This is where nature versus nurture comes into play.

Moritz Schlick is a representative of logical positivism doctrine. His definition of free will, determinism and moral responsibility derives from the definition of punishment. He supposes that “Punishment is an educative measure, and as such is a means to the formation of motives, which are in part to prevent the wrongdoer from repeating the act (reformation) and in part to prevent others from committing a similar act (intimidation). Analogously, in the case of reward we are concerned with an incentive." (Schlick, p. 152). So, Schlick’s view of free will and responsibility is connected with punishment. He supposes that a person in responsible if the punishment for his action is able to change his behavior in the future. So, his determinism differs a little from that of Blatchford. In his point of view, "we are trying to discover who is ultimately responsible" (D'Angelo, p. 37). So, he thinks that moral responsibility is not derived from heredity and environment. But what is the source of free will and moral responsibility? Schlick doesn’t give any unequivocal answer to this question. I think that moral responsibility depends on the scale of free will of a person and his attitude to the actions of other persons. In other words, our behaviour is the result of both our heredity and nature, and some outside factors which depend on our relation to other persons’

The concept of free will is thoroughly of significance to German philosopher, Friedrich Nietzsche just as it is of relevance to all other existentialist philosophers alike. In understanding Nietzsche’s account against free will, it is of utmost importance to first be aware of his theory on human nature in general as the two are interconnected. For a strong believer in free will, Nietzsche’s philosophy might simply be regarded as the ‘other’ or the opposite view, that is, a determinist view of human nature. Nietzsche’s view, however, is not necessarily deterministic per se and it is wrong to label him as such since he goes beyond the belief that all our actions are pre-determined. While it seems as though Nietzsche explicitly denies the existence

From the very beginning of time, whenever that may have been, I think the controversial topic “Fate or Free Will?” has always been debated. Some say your life has been set out and decided for you the moment that you took your first breath of air. Others say that your

Free will and fate are just a matter of perspective because one can neither prove it nor disprove it. I personally believe the supreme power, let’s call him ‘God’, granted the human beings freewill, meaning they have the autonomy of decision-making. I do not believe that

Moore’s analysis is very reflective of the essence of actual everyday life. It seems to avoid too much theory and sets out the proposition that some actions result from right choices by the ‘agent’ and are therefore free, and some do not result from these choices and are therefore not

Criminal behaviour has always been an interest for psychologists, for they could never quite come to a conclusion between nature and nurture. Research concerning this topic has been organized for many years and due to the never ending debate, is still being conducted. I have decided to read and write about this myself, for I was genuinely curious about the matter and wanted to be a part of the research, as I felt responsible to do so. I believe that in order to stop something, it must be discussed and scrutinized. What effects do genes have on criminal behaviour, why do peer pressure and habitat influence a person to commit crimes and are men really more violent than women? My paper aims to discuss the three different factors of criminal behaviour, what causes it and why. My essay will examine and focus mainly on the genetic makeup of a person, the environment in which they are raised in and gender differences.

Paulo Coelho once said: “I can control my destiny, but not my fate. Destiny means there are opportunities to turn right or left, but fate is a one-way street. I believe we all have the choice as to whether we fulfill our destiny, but our fate is sealed.” According to oxford dictionary, fate is the development of events outside a person’s control, regarded as predetermined by a super natural power. But destiny is a group of events will necessarily happen to a particular person or thing in the future. Fate is inevitable, but destiny is not. As we cannot determine fate, and the things going to happened in the future, we can control ourselves and the way we will