The Dilemma of Determinism
- In this essay, James
makes an argument about determinism. What is that argument?
Explain it in your own words. (Your explanation will be helped
by keeping in mind the traditional debate between determinism and free
will. This will better able you to see how James’ article is
orthogonal to this debate.)
- On page 215, James
speaks of “two necessarily implied corollaries of determinism”.
What are the two corollaries?
- What does James
mean when he says “In other words, our first act of freedom, if we
are free, ought in all inward propriety to be to affirm that we are
free” (216).
- What role does the
pragmatic definition of meaning play in James’ argument?
- Consider whether
the following two presuppositions that James makes are true:
- When we make theories
about the world and discuss them with one another, we do so in order
to attain a conception of things which shall give us subjective satisfaction.
- if there be two
conceptions, and the one seems to us, on the whole, more rational than
the other, we are entitled to suppose that the more rational one is
the truer of the two.
- Do these two presuppositions
amount to the a priorism that Peirce criticizes? Why or why not?
- What if any role
does James’ moral philosophy play in the way that he develops his
argument. In particular, I’m wondering about the idea of a “demand”.
(Look at 216 column 2.) Is this reasoning justified?
- Why does James want
to avoid the use of the word “freedom”?
- What’s the difference
between the two ways of thinking about “chance” (starting on page
218)?
- Why does determinism
lead to pessimism, on James’ view? What is the alternative?
(Bonus: How does this alternative relate to the problem of evil? How
does deterministic pessimism become deterministic optimism?)
(The problem of evil:
If God exists, and is omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing),
and omnibenevolent (perfectly good), how can we explain the existence
of evil in the world? If He is omnipotent He has the power to
prevent evil in the world. If He is omniscient, He knows about
evil. If He is omnibenevolent, he would prevent any evil that
He knows about that it is within His power to prevent. Yet evil
exists. Surely, this means that one of our premises is wrong,
but to deny one of these premises is to deny theism.)
- What is going on
in the paragraph that starts at the bottom of 222 (left column)?
Why does the implied wrongness of judgments of regret that is the result
of deterministic optimism lead to a deeper pessimism?
- What’s the problem
with pessimism?
- Why does soft determinism
lead to pessimism or subjectivism? (p. 222-223)
- What are James’
objections to subjectivism? Can you think of a practical example
of a way in which subjectivism makes people more passive? Can
you think of a practical example of a way in which subjectivism encourages
sensualism?
- In what way is
James’ argument for indeterminism at base a moral one?
- What’s the point
of the chessplayer analogy (229)? What is at issue here?
Does the analogy work?
