Discuss the free will vs determinism debate in psychology. [16 marks]
Determinism is the view that behaviour is controlled by external and internal factors working upon an
individual, which they have no control over. Within this there are several types of determinism.
Biological determinists believe that behaviour is controlled by biological influences (genetic, hormones,
evolutionary) influences that we cannot control. For example, research on intelligence has identified
genes, such as the IGF2R gene determining individual’s intelligence levels. On the other hand,
environmental determinists claim that behaviour is caused by features of the environment (such as
systems of reward and punishments) that we cannot control. For instance, studies conducted have
found that phobias may develop as a consequence of conditioning – a new stimulus response
relationship can be learned if the item (dog) is paired with a fear. Whereas, on the other hand of the
debate is freewill which is the notion that humans can make choices and is self-determined. For
instance, humanistic psychologists such as Maslow believe freedom is necessary to become functional
human beings and self-actualise. Soft determinism is a version of determinism that allows some element
of free will.
An argument for the determinism side of the debate is that there is evidence to support biological
determinism. For example, Hill et al (1999) found that a particular gene (IGF2R) is found with people
with high intelligence. This means that they are genes that can be passed on by an individuals parents
that may lead to explaining a certain type of behaviour. However, many psychologists do not support
this explanation of behaviour as it is seen as an excuse for criminal acts. For example, in 1981, Stephen
Mobley argued that he was ‘born to kill’ after killing a pizza shop manager because his fairly had a
history of violent and aggressive behaviour.
However, an argument against determinism is that biological determinism cannot independently explain
behaviour. For example, identical twin studies typically find an 80% similarity in intelligence scores and
40% similarity in the likelihood of depression. However, as identical twins share 100% of their genes,
these results suggest that 20% is caused by other (environmental) factors. This demonstrates that no
behaviour is completely biologically determined.
On the other hand, an argument for determinism is that it there is evidence to support it. For example,
the behaviourist approach in psychology adopts a deterministic view as they assume that behaviour is
controlled by something as simple as a stimulus-response association (through conditioning). This was
found when Skinner carried out his experiment in rats and found that behaviour was a result of learning
through the consequences of actions (rats who pressed a lever and received food were more likely to
repeat it, demonstrating positive reinforcement). This evidence support the idea of environmental
determinism, suggest that behaviour is simply a product of environmental learning thus supporting the
determinism side of the debate.
However, other psychologists suggest that behaviour is not determined and instead individuals have
free will. Everyday experience ‘gives the impression’ that we are constantly exercising free will through
the choices we make on any given day. This gives face validity to the concept of free will. To conclude, it
may be that behaviour is not completely determined or as a result of free will but the combination of
the two which would be known as soft determinism.
Determinism is the view that behaviour is controlled by external and internal factors working upon an
individual, which they have no control over. Within this there are several types of determinism.
Biological determinists believe that behaviour is controlled by biological influences (genetic, hormones,
evolutionary) influences that we cannot control. For example, research on intelligence has identified
genes, such as the IGF2R gene determining individual’s intelligence levels. On the other hand,
environmental determinists claim that behaviour is caused by features of the environment (such as
systems of reward and punishments) that we cannot control. For instance, studies conducted have
found that phobias may develop as a consequence of conditioning – a new stimulus response
relationship can be learned if the item (dog) is paired with a fear. Whereas, on the other hand of the
debate is freewill which is the notion that humans can make choices and is self-determined. For
instance, humanistic psychologists such as Maslow believe freedom is necessary to become functional
human beings and self-actualise. Soft determinism is a version of determinism that allows some element
of free will.
An argument for the determinism side of the debate is that there is evidence to support biological
determinism. For example, Hill et al (1999) found that a particular gene (IGF2R) is found with people
with high intelligence. This means that they are genes that can be passed on by an individuals parents
that may lead to explaining a certain type of behaviour. However, many psychologists do not support
this explanation of behaviour as it is seen as an excuse for criminal acts. For example, in 1981, Stephen
Mobley argued that he was ‘born to kill’ after killing a pizza shop manager because his fairly had a
history of violent and aggressive behaviour.
However, an argument against determinism is that biological determinism cannot independently explain
behaviour. For example, identical twin studies typically find an 80% similarity in intelligence scores and
40% similarity in the likelihood of depression. However, as identical twins share 100% of their genes,
these results suggest that 20% is caused by other (environmental) factors. This demonstrates that no
behaviour is completely biologically determined.
On the other hand, an argument for determinism is that it there is evidence to support it. For example,
the behaviourist approach in psychology adopts a deterministic view as they assume that behaviour is
controlled by something as simple as a stimulus-response association (through conditioning). This was
found when Skinner carried out his experiment in rats and found that behaviour was a result of learning
through the consequences of actions (rats who pressed a lever and received food were more likely to
repeat it, demonstrating positive reinforcement). This evidence support the idea of environmental
determinism, suggest that behaviour is simply a product of environmental learning thus supporting the
determinism side of the debate.
However, other psychologists suggest that behaviour is not determined and instead individuals have
free will. Everyday experience ‘gives the impression’ that we are constantly exercising free will through
the choices we make on any given day. This gives face validity to the concept of free will. To conclude, it
may be that behaviour is not completely determined or as a result of free will but the combination of
the two which would be known as soft determinism.
