Skip to main content
Log in

Why there are no good arguments for any interesting version of determinism

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper considers the empirical evidence that we currently have for various kinds of determinism that might be relevant to the thesis that human beings possess libertarian free will. Libertarianism requires a very strong version of indeterminism, so it can be refuted not just by universal determinism, but by some much weaker theses as well. However, it is argued that at present, we have no good reason to believe even these weak deterministic views and, hence, no good reason—at least from this quarter—to doubt that we are libertarian free. In particular, the paper responds to various arguments for neural and psychological determinism, arguments based on the work of people like Honderich, Tegmark, Libet, Velmans, Wegner, and Festinger.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Balaguer M. (2004) A coherent, naturalistic, and plausible formulation of libertarian free will. Nous 38: 379–406. doi:10.1111/j.0029-4624.2004.00475.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balaguer, M. (forthcoming). Free will as an open scientific problem. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Bell J.S. (1964) On the Einstein-Podolsy-Rosen paradox. Physics 1: 195–200

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell J.S. (1982) On the impossible pilot wave. Foundations of Physics 12: 989–999. doi:10.1007/BF01889272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohm D. (1952) A suggested interpretation of quantum theory in terms of ‘Hidden Variables’. Physical Review 85: 166–193. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.85.166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohm D., Hiley B.J. (1993) The undivided universe: An ontological interpretation of quantum mechanics. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Brasil-Neto J.P. (1992) Focal transcranial magnetic stimulation and response bias in a forced choice task. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry 55: 964–966. doi:10.1136/jnnp.55.10.964

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dayan P., Abbott L.F. (2001) Theoretical neuroscience. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Deecke L., Grotzinger B., Kornhuber H.H. (1976) Voluntary finger movement in man: Cerebral potentials and theory. Biological Cybernetics 23: 99. doi:10.1007/BF00336013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Festinger L. (1957) A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press, Palo Alto

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginet C. (1990) On action. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagan S., Hameroff S.R., Tuszyńki J.A. (2002) Quantum computation in brain microtubules: Decoherence and biological feasibility. Physical Review E: Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics 65: 061901. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.65.061901

    Google Scholar 

  • Haggard P., Eimer M. (1999) On the relation between brain potentials and the awareness of voluntary movements. Experimental Brain Research 126: 128–133. doi:10.1007/s002210050722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haggard P., Libet B. (2001) Conscious intention and brain activity. Journal of Consciousness Studies 8: 47–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Hameroff S.R., Penrose R. (1996) Conscious events as orchestrated space-time selections. Journal of Consciousness Studies 3: 36–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, D. (2002). Quantum physics, consciousness, and free will, in Kane (2002), pp. 85–110.

  • Honderich T. (1988) A theory of determinism: The mind, neuroscience and life-hopes. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Honderich, T. (2002). Determinism as true, compatibilism and incompatibilism as false, and the real problem, in Kane (2002), pp. 461–476.

  • Isen A., Levin P. (1972) Effect of feeling good on helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 21: 384–388. doi:10.1037/h0032317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kane R. (1996) The significance of free will. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kane, R. (eds) (2002) The Oxford handbook of free will. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kochen S., Specker E.P. (1967) The problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics 17: 59–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Kornhuber H., Deecke L. (1965) Hirnpotentialanderungen bei Willkurbewegungen und passiven Bewegungen des Menschen. Pflugers Archiv fur die Gesamte Physiologie des Menschen und der Tiere 284: 1–17. doi:10.1007/BF00412364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Libet, B. (2002). Do we have free will? in Kane (2002), pp. 551–564.

  • Libet B., Gleason C., Wright E., Pearl D. (1983) Time of conscious intention to act in relation to cerebral potential. Brain 106: 623–642. doi:10.1093/brain/106.3.623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mele A. (2006) Free will and luck. Oxford University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Milgram S. (1969) Obedience to authority. Harper and Row, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelkin D. (2005) Freedom, responsibility, and the challenge of situationism. Midwest Studies in Philosophy XXIX: 181–206. doi:10.1111/j.1475-4975.2005.00112.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penrose R., Hameroff S.R. (1995) What ‘Gaps’? Reply to Grush and Churchland. Journal of Consciousness Studies 2: 98–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Tegmark M. (2000) The importance of quantum decoherence in brain processes. Physical Review E: statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics 61: 4194. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.61.4194

    Google Scholar 

  • Velmans M. (1991) Is human information processing conscious?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 14: 651–669

    Google Scholar 

  • Walter H. (2001) Neurophilosophy of free will. MA: MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegner D. (2002) The illusion of conscious will. MA: MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark Balaguer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Balaguer, M. Why there are no good arguments for any interesting version of determinism. Synthese 168, 1–21 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9459-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9459-2

Keywords

Navigation