There has been a dispute in philosophy for a long time about the existence of free will, its definition and nature. As was correctly noted in the thread, there are two opposite positions: the ability of a person to make a choice regardless of certain circumstances. The first of them is rigid determinism – the statement that determinism is true and there is no free will (List, 2020). The second, according to thread, is metaphysical libertarianism – the statement that determinism is wrong and, thus, free will exists or at least is possible. Both of these positions, if they claim that determinism is incompatible with free will, are classified as incompatibilistic. If the role of determinism in this matter is denied, then such positions are called compatibilist.
It seems to me that the thread has not been sufficiently considered in detail the areas of life that are affected by the problem in question.The principle of free will has consequences in religion, ethics and science. For example, in religion, free will implies that a person’s desires and choices can coexist with divine omniscience (Dew & Gould, 2019). In ethics, the existence of free will determines the moral responsibility of people for their actions. In science, the study of free will can reveal ways to predict human behavior.
In my opinion, the thread provides convincing evidence of why the position of metaphysical libertarianism is more reasonable than determinism. I agree with the author’s arguments, and I also believe that a person has free will (Chilton, 2021). In my opinion, as in the opinion of the author of the thread, the concept of free will implies that an individual in certain circumstances can make a choice from several possible actions.
References
Barner, C. Chilton, B. G. (2021). Loki and the problem of determinism. Moral Apologetics. Web.
Dew, J. K. & Gould, P. M. (2019). Philosophy: A Christian introduction. Baker Academic.
List, C. (2020). Science hasn’t refuted free will. Boston Review. Web.