Discuss free will and determinism debate. Refer to two topics you have
studied in psychology in your answer. (16 marks)
Free will is the view that individuals have an active role in controlling their behaviour and
are free to choose their thoughts, actions and behaviours. This is the view of the humanistic
approach that humans are self-determining and have free will. Whereas determinism is the
view that free will is an illusion and our behaviour is controlled by external and internal
factors that we have no control of.
There are two version of determinism soft and hard. Hard determinism suggests all human
behaviour has a cause and there no room for free will (compatible with aims of science.)
Whereas soft determinism suggests all human action has a cause but people have conscious
mental control over behaviour. (allows for some elements of free will)
Determinism come in many types biological, environmental and psychic. Biological
determinism suggests that our behaviour is determined by genetic factors, hormones and
that we have no control over our physiological processes (influence of ANS on anxiety).
Environmental determinism argues our behaviour is caused by conditioning. Psychic
determinism sees behaviour determined by childhood experiences and innate drives (id, ego
and superego) as in Freuds model of psychological development.
A strength of determinism is that it is consistent with the aims of a science. For example, the
volume of research in prediction and control of behaviour has not only increased psychology
credibility and gave it more equal footing with other more established sciences, it has also
led to development of treatments which have benefitted many e.g drugs in managing
schizophrenia. This has led to the doubts of free will as disorders such as schizophrenia are
not choosing by individuals, because this behaviour is determined. Thus, this supports the
idea of determinism that our behaviour is controlled by external and internal factors that we
have no control of.
A limitation of hard determinism is that it is not consistent with the legal system. This is
because the idea of individual choice is not the cause of their behaviour, provides a
potential excuse for criminal acts. For example, in 1981 Stephen Mobley argued that he was
‘born to kill’ after killing a pizza shop manager, because he inherited a ‘criminal gene’ and
thus could not be held responsible for his actions. This argument was rejected by an
American court. Thus, a hard determinism position may be undesirable as it provides for an
excuse, allowing people to mitigate their own liability and this could lead to problematic
legal issue regarding the nature of responsibility and intent.
studied in psychology in your answer. (16 marks)
Free will is the view that individuals have an active role in controlling their behaviour and
are free to choose their thoughts, actions and behaviours. This is the view of the humanistic
approach that humans are self-determining and have free will. Whereas determinism is the
view that free will is an illusion and our behaviour is controlled by external and internal
factors that we have no control of.
There are two version of determinism soft and hard. Hard determinism suggests all human
behaviour has a cause and there no room for free will (compatible with aims of science.)
Whereas soft determinism suggests all human action has a cause but people have conscious
mental control over behaviour. (allows for some elements of free will)
Determinism come in many types biological, environmental and psychic. Biological
determinism suggests that our behaviour is determined by genetic factors, hormones and
that we have no control over our physiological processes (influence of ANS on anxiety).
Environmental determinism argues our behaviour is caused by conditioning. Psychic
determinism sees behaviour determined by childhood experiences and innate drives (id, ego
and superego) as in Freuds model of psychological development.
A strength of determinism is that it is consistent with the aims of a science. For example, the
volume of research in prediction and control of behaviour has not only increased psychology
credibility and gave it more equal footing with other more established sciences, it has also
led to development of treatments which have benefitted many e.g drugs in managing
schizophrenia. This has led to the doubts of free will as disorders such as schizophrenia are
not choosing by individuals, because this behaviour is determined. Thus, this supports the
idea of determinism that our behaviour is controlled by external and internal factors that we
have no control of.
A limitation of hard determinism is that it is not consistent with the legal system. This is
because the idea of individual choice is not the cause of their behaviour, provides a
potential excuse for criminal acts. For example, in 1981 Stephen Mobley argued that he was
‘born to kill’ after killing a pizza shop manager, because he inherited a ‘criminal gene’ and
thus could not be held responsible for his actions. This argument was rejected by an
American court. Thus, a hard determinism position may be undesirable as it provides for an
excuse, allowing people to mitigate their own liability and this could lead to problematic
legal issue regarding the nature of responsibility and intent.
