1
   

Freedom of choice, how to approch this exemple ?

 
 
stregoi
 
Reply Tue 23 Feb, 2016 07:55 am
Hi everyone .. i hope i can get some good inputs/inspiration on how to approach my "issue".
I am writing an essay about "freedom of choice", a point of view says that :
"a choice can never been absolutly free, if it is based on factors that cannot be freely choosen".
to illustrate that i came across this exemple :

"i am in my grandma's house" .... being there, is it really a free choice ?

taking in consideration the abouve point of view the answer is no, because the CULMINATION of factors that made me / contributed
to my choice are not freely choosed.

the factors that made me choose could be:

A) i have holidays ( i didnt choosed that )
B) my grandpa recently died ( i didnt choosed that )
C) my gradmother is alone ( i didnt choosed that )

so the factors A + B + C together contributed to taking my choice of being in my gandma's house.
but since ( A + B + C ) -> not freely chosen, then the choice that is caming out of them is not free as well

My question:
Somehow the above exemple, doesnt seem quite right, but i cannot find how to approach the argumentation of that

Even if ( A + B + C ) are not freely chosen, it does not mean that necessary the choice that is made in NOT freely chosen.

Any suggestion , please ?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 1 • Views: 2,042 • Replies: 5
No top replies

 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Feb, 2016 09:49 am
@stregoi,
You might get some ideas by wading through the "Is free will an illusion" thread current on the philosophy forum.
In the interim, my opinion is that 'choice' is merely a useful word in those social contexts where society holds individuals 'responsible' for their actions... i.e. where there are social consequences of the actions of an individual thereby giving substance to other concepts such as 'culpability', 'bravery'...etc. In short, the word 'choice' must be judged by its social functionality, and tends to have little meaning in mundane situations like 'choosing which shirt to wear'. Determinists will of course forever argue with religionists about the concept of 'free will', but such polar arguments tend to ignore the social dimensions of semantics.
In your example, the issue boils down to whether you feel yourself to be judged as 'a responsible caring individual.' Obviously 'your choice' would imply that, though you may simply be operating on a 'calculation' of 'how to be comfortable with yourself'.
(NB one view of 'self' is that it consists of an argumentative committee reflecting the diversity of society. Decisions can be fluid and inconsistent)
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Feb, 2016 11:19 am
@fresco,
Going from "self" to "self's" doesn't explain what X is on "selfity"...keep catching your own tail by jumping from one definition to another.
The first consequence about your thesis about reality meaning nothing without context is that anything you try to elaborate on has no ground either. Is just babble within context of more babble agreed by "social peers" whatever those are, or, "are not", according to you...yeah, what a mess...I often wonder if you sleep well at night.
0 Replies
 
stregoi
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Feb, 2016 01:52 pm
@stregoi,
well what i cannot really understand is that, if in my exemple, visting my grand's house is :

A free choice:
- then a combination of factors A+B+C ... can lead to many possible choices which i have to consider and choose from. that way the resulting choice will be free regardless of the "non free nature" of the factors.

Not a free choice:
- if the combination of factors A+B+C ... can only lead to ONE possible choice. Could this mean at any individual facing the exact combination will get the only and same choice ( visiting his/her grandma )
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Feb, 2016 03:18 pm
@stregoi,
Your 3 factors are merely a rationalization of a possible decision to socially 'do the right thing'. The 'any individual' phrase is vacuous. Yourdecision is based on yourparticular concept of 'doing the right thing'. If your committee actually considered the alternatives, then it made a calculation which alternative to take. If no alternatives were contemplated, then the word 'choice' is irrelevant. i.e. You had no choice, but 'another' might have.
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Feb, 2016 05:18 am
@fresco,
There is a distinction between considering alternatives and HAVING alternatives.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Freedom of choice, how to approch this exemple ?
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/13/2021 at 08:14:14