-
Libertarianism (sometimes also called Agency Theory): we feel introspectively
that we are free to decide what kind of person, self, or agent we will
be. If we are truly moral beings (and thus "ought" to behave in certain
ways), we must be able to do what is morally proper. If we ought
to do something, that assumes we can do it ("ought implies can").
In this way, the "person" is the cause of one's actions and one's behavior
is the result of his/her deliberation. A person is the result of
choices having been made. The task of a theory is to explain what
we experience; and insofar as determinism does not do that, it must be
rejected. Agency theory's reply to soft determinism: what causes
choices? Its reply to indeterminism: "free" actions would not be
mine. The libertarian alternative: the "person" is the cause, my
behavior is the result of my deliberation. A person is not a collection
of events or states, but the result of choices having been made.
This position might be called active self-determinism: we
can ultimately choose independently of culture and past conditioning because
we can be self-aware and can engage in a critique of ourselves. In short,
we can transcend or "step outside" of ourselves to reflect on what we have
become and decide whether we want to remain that way. This self-awareness
allows us to be free to make new and creative decisions.
Objections:
-
The belief in moral freedom is purely subjective and introspective; it
is based solely (and mistakenly) on the feeling that we are free.
-
To say that a person as subject is not the same as the objective self implies
that a person's choices or actions are not caused by his/her (objective)
personality or character. But that would make choices and actions
completely arbitrary and unconnected to the person making the choices or
doing the actions.
-
Coming to know about oneself reflectively does not make oneself any less
determined, for the process of coming to know oneself reflectively would
presumably be just as determined as other knowledge.
-
Doesn't the sheer fact of self-reflection really mean that self-consciousness
is outside the order of deterministic causes? But how is that possible?
-
Besides, as the soft determinist says, thinking that people are free is
essential to morality. That is, it is important that we think that
actions follow from character, passions or affections rather than external
force or violence. We punish and reward to change behavior in the
future. If we deny freedom (as the hard determinist does), then there
cannot be any morality. To blame or praise assumes actions proceed from
the character of the person. If an action is forced or done ignorantly,
we may say the act is wrong but that the person is not responsible.
Or if the person repents (reforms his personality), we forgive. So,
cause (necessity, determinism) is essential to morality.