Hume s Theory Of Free Will - 2486 Words

1- The purpose of this paper: In this paper, I will defend Hume’s definition of free will in which he emphasized the freedom of action instead of freedom of will. For Hume, freedom means only the absence of external coercive force. I will argue in favor of Hume definition of free will from three perspectives. Firstly, I will argue that Hume’s agnosticism concerning the problem of mind and body relation was the solid epistemological basis for this this definition and it has not been refuted on scientific grounds. Unlike Descartes, Hume didn’t speculate about the nature of human mind and whether it exists independently from the body. Secondly, the narrow definition of free will or freedom of action provides the most intelligible†¦show more content†¦Moreover, God created the world with unbreakable regularity and gave human limited ability to learn and be guided by them. God commanded us to act or not to act at given circumstances and we were given the fre e will to act and not to act, consistent with human ability to learn about regularity of the law of nature. 2- Summary of Hume’s philosophical position in the enquiry: In his inquiry concerning human understanding, David Hume the Scottish philosopher defended his deterministic view of the world. At the same time, he maintained that this view doesn’t contradict with human free will as basis for morality. In that article, Hume proposed the concept of necessity by which he meant that nothing exists without a cause of its existence. It is universally accepted that every natural effect determined by the energy of its cause. It is also a fact of life that the natural law permits no other effect to result from that the same cause under the same exact circumstances. There is, indeed, unbreakable prevailing regularity and interdependence of natural phenomena from which human get guidance for proper course of actions. According to Hume, human learns about causation and necessity from observable regularity in the law of nature. If there is no such