Free will/Determinism
The free will and determinism debate explores the extent to which one's
behaviour is determined either by controlled internal and external factors or their
choices.
Deterministic side - believes that all behaviours are predetermined by factors
out of our control
Free will side - humans can and do make choices through our thoughts and
actions, influencing our behaviours as we are self determined.
Hard determinism - implies free will is not possible whatsoever
Soft determinism - implies all behaviours have causes but it can also be
determined by our conscious thoughts
Biological determinism - the belief that behaviour is caused by uncontrollable
biological influences like genetics and ones innate capacity
Environmental determinism - the belief that behaviour is caused by uncontrollable
features of the environment/external factors like reward and punishment
A belief in free will does not deny that internal and external forces contribute to
behaviour but ultimately that humans have the capability to control and choose
how to behave in response to them.
A limitation of Determinism is its incompatible with conventional views on morality
and the legal system
Many Psychologists don’t favour the determinism viewpoint that external/internal
forces determine behaviour because it provides as a potential excuse for
undesirable behaviours in society such as offending.
For example offenders in court have previously used the argument that they have
been born with a predisposition to be violent or aggressive to mitigate their liability
Although courts reject this argument, accepting and adopting a deterministic
position is undesirable due to it’s implications on society as it could lead to legal
issues regarding mens rea
Free will/Determinism 1
, A strength of Free will is that certain fields of psychology such as humanistic
psychology have highly benefited/been understood due to the concept of free
will.
This is evident in studies and theories such as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs,
where their main argument is that free will is necessary for the last stage of the
hierarchy which is self actualization
This is because it requires effort and motivation to be wanting to do it and is not a
predetermined behaviour that occurs on its own.
Humanists also go one to argue how certain tasks can’t occur without free will like
how can humans change without free will
ex. a drug addict becoming clean, this reinforces that we actively make choices to
understand ourselves and put energy into our characteristics and behaviours.
Though there is a lack of empirical evidence in terms of free will, we apply it in our
day to day life, realising that we make choices which influence our behaviour.
A limitation of Free will is that it doesn’t allow for scientific rigour/credibility
This is due to the fact that its subjective and so can’t objectively be measured to
provide empirical evidence.
This is evident in humanistic psychology which includes Maslow's hierarchy of
needs, a theory based on free will with no quantifiable evidence. This is an issue
because as free will is a non physical vague concept, its hard to test, falsify and
replicate.
This shows the lack of evidence to prove validity of free will and for a subject
striving to be accepted as a science, it is unreliable to use the free will
perspective.
Free will/Determinism 2
, Holism/Reductionism
The reductionism and holism debate explores the extent to which behaviour and
characteristics are determined by either a singular factor or a multitude of
influences.
The reductionist side is concerned with the principle of parsimony and states that
behaviour is understood only by breaking it down to parts
The holistic side considers behaviour through only analysing a person as a whole
considering their whole experience including social, cognitive, environmental and
more.
Parsimony is the basis of all science and tells us to choose the simplest scientific
explanation that fits the evidence.
the reductionist approach considers 2 major parts including the biological
reductionism approach and the environmental reductionism approach.
Biological reductionism is based on the idea that we are biological organisms
made up of physiological structures, and processes such as neurochemistry,
hormonal system and genetic influences that determine all our behaviours.
On the other hand, the environmental reductionist approach states that behaviour
is obtained only through stimulus response relationships which should all be
measurable within a lab
For example the idea that attachment between children and mother occurs only
due to the mother rewarding the infant with food (stimulus) leading to positive
feelings for the child.
Holism believes that behaviour is much more complex than the reductionism
approach which is why it considers various factors/looks at the larger picture to
understand the causation and choices of one's behaviour.
Rose proposed that there are different levels of explanation.
The lowest level of explanation would include Biological explanations where
behaviour is explained in its smallest parts including genetics, neurochemicals and
biological structures. At this level explanations are considered reductionist.
Holism/Reductionism 1
, Middle level explanations reduce behaviour to Psychological Explanations (e.g
Cognitive and Behavioural).
The highest level considers both Social and Cultural explanations where behaviour
is explained in regards of the influence of social groups
A strength of Reductionism is that it supports a scientific approach.
Reducing behaviour to single factors that can be studied is useful in Psychology
as it allows for experimental research to take place.
By breaking behaviour down, we can isolate operationalised variables than can be
manipulated and controlled in a laboratory setting.
These variables can then be measured to determine the contribution they have to
behaviour.
Experimental research has produced empirical support for a range of
psychological theories including the role of our biology in psychological illness for
example the role of the neurotransmitter serotonin in symptoms of OCD.
This demonstrates how reducing a complex behaviour to single factors allows
psychology to have scientific credibility.
A limitation of Reductionism is that Biological reductionism ignores the complexity
of human behaviour
Reducing behaviour to lower levels such as our biology may result in other
variables being overlooked which can lead to an incomplete understanding of the
behaviour
For example this can be problematic when isolating a single biological cause for a
psychological illness when a variety of factors may be involved, ignoring its
complexity.
whereas having a more holistic approach in psychological explanations, such as
by adopting an interactionist approach, can allow for the prevention of
reoccurrence of a disorder due to other influencing factors not being considered.
Thus reinforcing the weakness of reductionism, and increasing effectiveness of
holistic explanations in explaining the causes of disorders.
A limitation of holism is that though it considers all levels of explanation, it is
difficult to evidence
Holism/Reductionism 2
The free will and determinism debate explores the extent to which one's
behaviour is determined either by controlled internal and external factors or their
choices.
Deterministic side - believes that all behaviours are predetermined by factors
out of our control
Free will side - humans can and do make choices through our thoughts and
actions, influencing our behaviours as we are self determined.
Hard determinism - implies free will is not possible whatsoever
Soft determinism - implies all behaviours have causes but it can also be
determined by our conscious thoughts
Biological determinism - the belief that behaviour is caused by uncontrollable
biological influences like genetics and ones innate capacity
Environmental determinism - the belief that behaviour is caused by uncontrollable
features of the environment/external factors like reward and punishment
A belief in free will does not deny that internal and external forces contribute to
behaviour but ultimately that humans have the capability to control and choose
how to behave in response to them.
A limitation of Determinism is its incompatible with conventional views on morality
and the legal system
Many Psychologists don’t favour the determinism viewpoint that external/internal
forces determine behaviour because it provides as a potential excuse for
undesirable behaviours in society such as offending.
For example offenders in court have previously used the argument that they have
been born with a predisposition to be violent or aggressive to mitigate their liability
Although courts reject this argument, accepting and adopting a deterministic
position is undesirable due to it’s implications on society as it could lead to legal
issues regarding mens rea
Free will/Determinism 1
, A strength of Free will is that certain fields of psychology such as humanistic
psychology have highly benefited/been understood due to the concept of free
will.
This is evident in studies and theories such as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs,
where their main argument is that free will is necessary for the last stage of the
hierarchy which is self actualization
This is because it requires effort and motivation to be wanting to do it and is not a
predetermined behaviour that occurs on its own.
Humanists also go one to argue how certain tasks can’t occur without free will like
how can humans change without free will
ex. a drug addict becoming clean, this reinforces that we actively make choices to
understand ourselves and put energy into our characteristics and behaviours.
Though there is a lack of empirical evidence in terms of free will, we apply it in our
day to day life, realising that we make choices which influence our behaviour.
A limitation of Free will is that it doesn’t allow for scientific rigour/credibility
This is due to the fact that its subjective and so can’t objectively be measured to
provide empirical evidence.
This is evident in humanistic psychology which includes Maslow's hierarchy of
needs, a theory based on free will with no quantifiable evidence. This is an issue
because as free will is a non physical vague concept, its hard to test, falsify and
replicate.
This shows the lack of evidence to prove validity of free will and for a subject
striving to be accepted as a science, it is unreliable to use the free will
perspective.
Free will/Determinism 2
, Holism/Reductionism
The reductionism and holism debate explores the extent to which behaviour and
characteristics are determined by either a singular factor or a multitude of
influences.
The reductionist side is concerned with the principle of parsimony and states that
behaviour is understood only by breaking it down to parts
The holistic side considers behaviour through only analysing a person as a whole
considering their whole experience including social, cognitive, environmental and
more.
Parsimony is the basis of all science and tells us to choose the simplest scientific
explanation that fits the evidence.
the reductionist approach considers 2 major parts including the biological
reductionism approach and the environmental reductionism approach.
Biological reductionism is based on the idea that we are biological organisms
made up of physiological structures, and processes such as neurochemistry,
hormonal system and genetic influences that determine all our behaviours.
On the other hand, the environmental reductionist approach states that behaviour
is obtained only through stimulus response relationships which should all be
measurable within a lab
For example the idea that attachment between children and mother occurs only
due to the mother rewarding the infant with food (stimulus) leading to positive
feelings for the child.
Holism believes that behaviour is much more complex than the reductionism
approach which is why it considers various factors/looks at the larger picture to
understand the causation and choices of one's behaviour.
Rose proposed that there are different levels of explanation.
The lowest level of explanation would include Biological explanations where
behaviour is explained in its smallest parts including genetics, neurochemicals and
biological structures. At this level explanations are considered reductionist.
Holism/Reductionism 1
, Middle level explanations reduce behaviour to Psychological Explanations (e.g
Cognitive and Behavioural).
The highest level considers both Social and Cultural explanations where behaviour
is explained in regards of the influence of social groups
A strength of Reductionism is that it supports a scientific approach.
Reducing behaviour to single factors that can be studied is useful in Psychology
as it allows for experimental research to take place.
By breaking behaviour down, we can isolate operationalised variables than can be
manipulated and controlled in a laboratory setting.
These variables can then be measured to determine the contribution they have to
behaviour.
Experimental research has produced empirical support for a range of
psychological theories including the role of our biology in psychological illness for
example the role of the neurotransmitter serotonin in symptoms of OCD.
This demonstrates how reducing a complex behaviour to single factors allows
psychology to have scientific credibility.
A limitation of Reductionism is that Biological reductionism ignores the complexity
of human behaviour
Reducing behaviour to lower levels such as our biology may result in other
variables being overlooked which can lead to an incomplete understanding of the
behaviour
For example this can be problematic when isolating a single biological cause for a
psychological illness when a variety of factors may be involved, ignoring its
complexity.
whereas having a more holistic approach in psychological explanations, such as
by adopting an interactionist approach, can allow for the prevention of
reoccurrence of a disorder due to other influencing factors not being considered.
Thus reinforcing the weakness of reductionism, and increasing effectiveness of
holistic explanations in explaining the causes of disorders.
A limitation of holism is that though it considers all levels of explanation, it is
difficult to evidence
Holism/Reductionism 2
