The concept of free will is a frequently discussed issue these days. The emergence and popularization of democratic values all around the world raised the question of social and political pressures that used to be overlooked in the past. In philosophy, the concept of free will is defined as an individual’s ability to choose how to act in particular situations; the presence of free will assumes the existence of multiple alternatives among which a person could choose (Free Will, 2010).
The following is a social life situation I would like to review in order to discuss my perception of a free will limitation example in the contemporary world. The limitation occurred when I was invited to a friend’s birthday party that was held at a club. Trying to enter the club my other friend and I were stopped by the security person who told us we were not allowed in due to our inadequate appearances. Namely, our clothes did not match the dress code – I was wearing a “wrong” pair of trousers (jeans), and my friend had “wrong” shoes on (sneakers). In other words, our desire (free will) to wear particular clothes was compromised by the rules developed in particular communities. As a result, we ended up feeling insulted personally and facing an uncomfortable choice – having to go back home and change. At some point, we had decided not to come back at all but were pressured by another social belief that refusing to attend one’s birthday party would offend the host. We had to inform the host, and as they lived not so far away from the club, the solution was to take us to their home where we could borrow more socially acceptable clothes and shoes. In other words, we ended up obeying the rules and changing our behavior to meet the social expectations.
In philosophy, the question of free will is argued about because of differing opinions as to which behaviors are to be considered as dictated by free will (Free Will, 2010). For instance, violence is a part of human nature; so, is there any alternative to it, can it be eliminated from the society, and should the individuals be given a choice as to their desire to act violently? (Cohen, 2013). The absolute free will for everyone could easily result in a total chaos due to the clash of choices and desires among the individuals. That is why, in the modern societies there are rules that force persons to compromise and limit their initiatives. For instance, social contract theory explains that some of the freedoms of an individual are to be given up for the sake of other freedoms to be protected by the law (Friend, n. d.). In other words, an individual cannot go and murder whoever they dislike, but at the same time they are protected from being attacked by the others. However, the question is whether or not the limitations of all behaviors fall under the social contract explanation.
The society has many reasons to dictate one’s choices of clothes (religious, ethical, aesthetic), and overall, there is not much difference in dress codes for a church or a club. It is the type of authority that dictates the rules that makes one obey or reject them (religious leaders are considered higher than the club owners). An individual’s decision as to following or rejecting the rules is personal, however, it results in particular conditions. For instance, refusing to obey the rules and change clothes to enter a club, I would preserve my pride by would have to face the dissatisfaction of my friend who had a party. That way, free will and alternatives exist in the modern world, but they are very superficial and multiple that regardless of one’s desires, the choice they make matches the social expectations.
Reference List
Cohen, D. (2013). The Limits of Free Will in Human Action. Web.
Free Will. (2010). Web.
Friend, C. (n. d.). Social Contract Theory. Web.