The ability to make decisions without being manipulated or obstructed is known as free will. It is intimately linked to the concepts of guilt, duty, praise, sin, and assumptions regarding freely chosen acts. Persuasion, prohibition, suggestion, and deliberation were all associated with it. Naturally, works completed willingly and without coercion merit blame or credit. Many people are concerned about the possibility of free will being jeopardized, and this is a topic that needs to be discussed. When it comes to free will, the central principle that comes to mind is self-determination. The right to select a situation in which previous circumstances have not decided the outcome is generally referred to as freewill. According to the theory of determinism that the possibility lies on only one course of instances, which is matching the free will as conceived. The ancient philosophy of Greek identified this problem and many are yet to be discussed about it in philosophical debates. According to Palmer (6), In compatibilism is the concept of determinism to be compatible with free will, where libertarianism of metaphysics is encompassed, which tends to justify determinism as real and that shows the possibility of free will. Hard in compatibilism is also covered by the free will which holds both and the negativity of being incompatible with free will, and whatever the case regarding determinism free will is impossible.
Besides, determinism is compatible with free will, a concept which is held by compatibilists. Others maintain that for free will-determinism is necessary, arguing that making a choice involves preferring a course of action over the other, with the need of the turnout of the options. Compatibilists consider the debate between hard determinists and libertarians over determinism versus free will as a dilemma based on false. Different compatibilists have different definitions of the meaning of free will, and this brings out different types of constraints for the issue to be relevant. Free will is considered as nothing more than freedom of action by classical compatibilists. Free will is also identified as a capacity of psychology other contemporary compatibilists, such that one’s behaviour can direct a responsive way of reasoning. Many are different conceptions of free will, each depicting their concerns, but the feature shared is common where both are not finding free will possibly being threatened by the possibility of determinism (Palmer, pp.6).
The questions that need to be answered is whether we can control our actions, and what kind of control, if so, and the extent to which we can control our actions. The sense of freedom by humans is powerful which leads to a belief that one has free will. Again, a feeling of free will which is intuitive could be a mistake. To reconcile evidence of intuition that decisions of conscious are active with the notion that the world of physics can be described to function correctly by the law of physics precisely is difficult. The disagreement between the freedom of intuition and the rule of nature arises when either physical determinism or casual closure contends. No physical event has an outside cause of the physical domain with the occasional closing, and by preceding instances, the future determined with physical determinism. The complexity of reconciling a deterministic universe with ‘free will’ is referred to a free will problem, in other words, the determinism dilemma. Moral dilemma results from the determinism dilemma: the question of actions with the responsibilities assigned to it if events of the past cause them.
Compatibilists state that mental reality is not causally effective of itself (Palmer 6). Others have classically addressed free will dilemma by arguing that it holds as long as one is not coerced or constrained externally. Compatibilists in modern make a difference between freedom of action and freedom of will, which means, setting apart the freedom to enact the choice and the freedom of making this choice. With the fact that humans experience a free will sense, some compatibilists thinks that to accommodate this intuition is of necessity. They associate the ability to make rational decisions with the freedom of will.
An approach of in compatibilists is another approach to the dilemma. This means that for the case of the deterministic world, it is an illusion to feel that one has the freedom to choose an action. The form of in compatibilism that posits that free will is possible and that determinism is false is known as metaphysical libertarianism. This concept affiliated to the dualism of tradition, including construction of non-materialism and more minimal criteria supporting the models. This includes the ability to veto a competing desire or an action. Many arguments have been made contrariwise to libertarianism which assigning them is confusing, with even physical determinism.
Theologians and philosophers have conceptualized the idea of free will as if it is either off or on, but there are many ways of looking at the human agency. Others suggest the use of sophisticated abilities and freedom of choice to make responses to particular situations in life.
Palmer, Donald. Does the Center Hold? : An Introduction to Western Philosophy: Sixth