Some thoughts on freedom

Robert,

I was thinking about freedom after your lecture. I am quite clear about hard determinism and libertarianism, but wasn’t very sure anywhere in the lecture you’ve mentioned soft determinism. Here is a guess or maybe a definition that I think would be compatible for both.

Our beliefs, wants and desires maybe T.DET in someway, and so do our choices, decisions and willings, which maybe caused just by our beliefs, wants and desires. In result of these choices, decisions and willings, we would have some actions. However, we may not be able to act out what our choices result into. For example at this moment I’ve made a choice or decision to raise my hand up, but there is a chain tied on my wrist to a padlock on the wall. Therefore I can’t raise my hand, i.e. I lost my freedom of raising my hand. Instead of saying what freedom is, maybe it’s easier to say what would stop us from being free. If we lose the possibility of converting our choices or decisions or willings into actions then this may be the lost of freedom. Since “you are free” means “you can act out what your choice/decision/willing is” in this context, therefore moral responsibility is held. This probably fits the relationship between freedom and moral responsibility described in 1 Corinthians 6:12 – “All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.”, but this does not fit the “freedom” the Bible is talking about – which is a freedom of choices/decisions/willings from our sinful nature (want/desire), i.e. our choices/decisions/willings are not determined by our sinful nature anymore.

Here I have another question. In my understanding T.DET is similar to Buddhism idea of Kamma, everything is determined by something and is determining something else in the chain. If this is the case then does Buddhism actually believes that there is no freedom and everything is just part of an inevitable sequence? Why do they teach believers to do well or to search for truth then? A person is in Kamma so whatever he is going to do (how he treat people, will he search for truth, what would he believe) is determined by the causes (which are the results of some other things) happened on him anyway. Or maybe T.DET is a bit different from Buddhism’s doctrine of Kamma?

Regards,
Jacqualine