A Contemporary Introduction to Free Will

Fundamentals of Philosophy Series

by Robert H. Kane

Accessible to students with no background in the subject, A Contemporary Introduction to Free Will provides an extensive and up-to-date overview of all the latest views on this central problem of philosophy. Opening with a concise introduction to the history of the problem of free will--and its place in the history of philosophy--the book then turns to contemporary debates and theories about free will, determinism, and related subjects like moral responsibility, coercion, compulsion, autonomy, agency, rationality, freedom, and more. Classical compatibilist and new compatibilist theories of free will are considered along with the latest incompatibilist or libertarian theories and the most recent skeptical challenges to free will. Separate chapters are devoted to the relation of free will to moral responsibility and ethics; to modern science; and to religious questions about predestination, divine foreknowledge, and human freedom. Numerous down-to-earth examples and challenging
thought experiments enliven the text. The book is an ideal addition to introduction to philosophy, metaphysics, and free will courses.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Science, Metaphysics, Psychology, Action

196 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2005

Reviews

[Belhor Crowley · Rating 5 out of 5]

به جرات میشه گفت بهترین کتابی هست که در مورد مسئله ی اختیار نوشته شده
خیلی دقیق و روشن و قابل درک مباحث مختلف فلسفی در زمینه ی اختیار رو توضیح میده و در فصل های آخر هم به بررسی مورد از نظر علوم پایه میپردازه
به نظر من نویسنده خیلی خوب تونسته بود نظر خودش رو از خواننده مخفی کنه و به نظرم بی طرف موارد رو بررسی کرده بود که کار سختی هست از نظر من مخصوصا که اگر مثل من به جبر نرم اعتقاد داشته باشید
به همه پیشنهاد میکنم این کتاب رو بخونن

"A man can do what he wants, but not want what he wants."

[Yassine Tetbirt · Rating 5 out of 5]

What can I say?
The book is Brilliant, the writer, Robert Kane, tried and succeded in covering the most important opinions and their arguments in the debate of the topic, The Free-Will.
I wanted to talk about the book, what convinced me the most, but I think that this is not very important. it's so far one of the deepest topics that I thought of and read about, and what I can say, regardless of what I support, is that there is not a single side that we can say that it is 100 percent strong and incriticable. what I'am going to talk about is the writer, Robert Kane. Man, I would never believe that there exist a man that can write so objectively about something the way Robert did it in this book. A libertarian whom, because of the way he presents the other opinions, their strong and week points, the arguments that tries to defeat his side (Libertarianism). Because of how he shows that even his side is not a 100 percent incriticable, you sometimes think that he's a Deterministic.
Hats off

[Zoe Jackson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kane nearly lost another star from me for using the chapter entitled 'Free Will and Modern Science' to push his own implausible fringe barrow on the compatibility between his conception of free will and contemporary neuroscience. There is almost minimal scientific detail in the chapter regarding even Kane's thesis, let alone any overview of the wide-ranging, fascinating and vitally important scientific research that has been done in this area over the last decade. In an introductory text, the omission is unforgivable. Otherwise, the book is as others have said: incredibly lucid, comprehensive and accessible. But philosophical debates regarding free will always seem, to me, to have the arrow between ideas and the physical world pointing in the wrong direction. Surely we should start with the framework the physical world provides for understanding notions like causation, determinism, agency, freedom and the like, and then mould our theory of free will (or the lack thereof) accordingly? Many incompatiblists seem to work in the other direction - assuming that the allegedly 'intuitive' and traditional conception of free will *must*, somehow, be right and then scrounging around for conceptually and physically coherent ways to make this so. Such a problem is evident throughout Kane's book, and I was really hoping the '...Modern Science' chapter would provide some redress. To say I was sorely disappointed would be an understatement.

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is hands down the best introduction to the issue of "free will" that exists today. Kane is writing to the beginning philosophy student, but I assume a Phi. prof who has never taught on free will, or spent much time studying the issue, would profit from this book.

Kane's book is both extremely clear on the issues surrounding free will, it is also not too technical, and it also manages to bring the reader up to speed on what is a very technical, wide-ranging, and sophisticated debate.

Kane is a libertarian about free will. This means that free choices or actions are incompatible with determinism, and also that the agent who acts or chooses is ultimately responsible for those actions. Kane holds that there may be times when a person's choices and actions are the outcome of some prior cause outside of the person, but for this person to be responsible and free she had to, at some time in the past, be responsible for forming her character, for setting her will in a direction. This forming is "up to her" and is indeterministic. The agent had alternative possibilities, and formed herself one way rather than another.

I am a compatibilist. That means I believe that free will (any freedom worth having) is compatible with determinism. Kane expressed my position very well (as far as the philosophical aspects of it, as a theist there's more I'd like said). He provides the reader with a brief history of compatibilist (classical compatibilism of the David Hume, Jonathon Edwards sort) accounts of what it means to be "free" and what it means to be able to say you "could have done otherwise," before focusing on contemporary compatibilist positions. I believe his presentation of my side was fair and strongly argued. In fact, I think it was so well-argued that I believe most readers will find Kane's argument for libertarianism (towards the end) not-intuitive and unable to deal strongly with the objections put to libertarianism via compatibilism.

This book also focuses on moral responsibility and what it is to be a proper subject of ascriptions of praise or blame. What is it to be responsible for your actions? This is important because many people tie questions of moral responsibility and freedom so close as to be almost inseparable, such that if one can (say) show that one's actions or choices can be morally responsible even if determined, one has shown that one can be free even if determinism is true. Of course no account of moral responsibility can be properly done without reference to what has been called, "Frankfurt-type counter examples," after the philosopher Harry Frankfurt. Here's a quick rundown:

Many say that an agent cannot be held morally responsible for a choice or an action if that person could not have chosen or acted otherwise. Seems fairly intuitive, right? Not so, said Frankfurt. Imagine someone locked in a room, though they don't know that they are locked in the room. The door has a glass window in the middle of it so that you can look out. Now, say you hear some screams coming from the hallway outside the room. You look at the window and see a woman being attacked. You decide that you don't want to help her and you sit on the bed and turn on the boob tube. Are you morally responsible? Even though you couldn't have done otherwise?

Some say, "Yes, because even though you couldn't have done otherwise through no fault of your own, you could have chosen to do otherwise, i.e., made the choice to try and help. But Frankfurt just tweaks the examples. He asks us to consider a controller, Black, who implants a device in your head such that if you choose the way he wants he will do nothing, but if he sees that you're not going to choose the way he wants, he will press a button and make you choose his way. Now say that you end up choosing the way Black wanted (say, to vote for a poor presidential candidate), so he never had to press the button. Are you morally responsible for your choice? It would seem so. After all, you made it, you were not forced, you presumably had reasons to vote the way you did, etc. So it looks like ability to do otherwise isn't necessary for moral responsibility, and then also freedom.

There are responses to the above, and then responses to the responses. The issue is a very detailed one, as you can see, and Kane walks you through it like a skilled scout master.

Kane even allows that some particular actions/choices you do you may be held responsible even if you couldn't have done otherwise. But, Kane says that you would not be ultimately responsible if you were indeterministically able to form your character some time in the past. At some point you had to have been able to go either A or B, and you, without any prior cause or reason, decided to go, say way B. You had to be responsible for forming your character. At later dates your character might determine what you do, but you are ultimately responsible for who you are.

The last thing I will point out is that Kane has a chapter on how divine foreknowledge and free will are supposed to relate. He explains the problem and the various solutions very well. He didn't spend much time on my solution - the Calvinistic one - and I thought he was too dismissive. I'm not sure he has studied our answers out that much since he didn't provide resources from those I would associate with, viz., Paul Helm, John Frame, etc., in the suggested reading at the end of the chapters (which, by the way, was another excellent bonus in the book. Kane offers a suggested reading list at the end of each chapter so the interested reader can study this debate out more fully.).

If you're looking to get into the metaphysics of free will debate, this is the place to start, bar none. Be careful, though, it's easy to get bit by the free will bug. The debate has been going on between philosophers for thousands of years without any common consensus on the matter, you'll see why.

[Lama Hussein · Rating 5 out of 5]

كمقدمة رائع جدا
أجاب عن كل سؤال خطر لي أثناء القراءة

[Italo Lins Lemos · Rating 4 out of 5]

Em "A Contemporary Introduction to Free Will", Robert Kane apresenta com clareza e de modo abrangente uma série de formulações e respostas acerca do Problema da Liberdade (e do Determinismo). Até o momento, essa foi a melhor introdução que eu li sobre o tema.

[Hoda · Rating 5 out of 5]

A truly good choice if you want to get a wide range of ideas on Free Will n see if it's even possible or not.
It's easy to understand even without much knowledge of philosophy. Also gives you lots of references if you wanna read more~
It'd be better if there was more info on the matter of God, or even the religious views. But the book serves its purpose just right, so.. I recommend it if you just wanna start!

[Max Sacher · Rating 5 out of 5]

Clear, concise, and super interesting.

[Jef Gerets · Rating 3 out of 5]

Goede introductie in het vrije wil debat. De mogelijke posities worden uitgebreid uiteen gezet. Alleen spijtig dat het vrije wil debat zelf zo saai is.

[Vincenzo Fiorentino · Rating 4 out of 5]

Easy to read and thought-provoking. Overall, a very good book.

I would have preferred a more thorough analysis of the so-called "hard determinism" or, more generally, of the ideas of those advocating the "illusion of free will". Too many pages were spent on the short-sightedness of "classical compatibilists" and the too-convenient (and often mystical) solutions of the "libertarians".

It was fascinating to see that many people are serious about "solving" the issue of free will by somehow postulating free will in the first place.

This book taught me a lot so I can only recommend it. Little advice for future editions: please include larger margins.

[Brecht Casper · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very good, concise, and brief introduction to the free will debate. Kane manages to give a reasonably objective overview of the different problems, arguments, and counterarguments - which is a not to be underrated achievement.

[Brandt · Rating 4 out of 5]

Have you ever had “the conversation” with anyone about “free will?” Sometimes the idea is explained differently viz., “free choice,” free agency,” etc. These discussions rarely focus on an understanding of the various arguments and positions available within the subject. Thankfully, you can take just a little of your time and read this book. Admittedly, the stances available can sometimes create confusion. However, Robert H. Kane has presented them, along with accompanying arguments, in a simplified format that will engage the reader.

As an example, the issues of free will force us to think about the Laws of Nature, human psychology, and social conditioning. We all tend to have varying definitions of freedom; yet, freedom is a word with great utility. It can mean “freedom” in the sense of doing what we want, what to eat for dinner, or whom you are going to vote for. These freedoms are surface freedoms, and the type of freedom meant by free will runs far deeper than that.

Thus, Kane takes the reader on a voyage, explaining the basic problems of free will, the popular stances to the problem, and a multitude of conundrums and considerations, that come into play. To Kane's credit, he presents the positions as accurately as he is able. Further, it is very hard to determine his bias throughout the reading. Prior to the conclusion, Kane explains his own theory, and how it answers some of the earlier enigmas of free will. This book far exceeds most of the other academic attempts at explaining the subject. The style is fresh, and can be easily understood by a wide audience. Kane's rare talent is his ability to present the theories accurately without “setting them up” to contrast with his view.

The various theories, pertaining to the free will argument, are overwhelming. Kane has found the most effective of these arguments, and proceeds to show the counter-arguments, and rebuttals. By painting concise “word pictures,” Kane is able to present some of the more difficult concepts in easy to understand metaphors. If you have any interest in the argument - and you should! - this book is a great place to start. Happy reading!

P.S. If you have a deep interest, or want to explore the ideas expressed by Kane in this book, I suggest also picking up a copy of Free Will edited by Gary Watson. This compilation of essays, includes all the arguments, counter-arguments, and rebuttals highlighted by Kane.

[Henry Sloan · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've recently become interested in free will, and I intend to do some writing about it. However, I'm not a philosophy student, so I felt I should inform myself about the history of free will philosophy.

This book is one of the most thought-provoking and informative books I've ever read, period. It clarified ideas I've had on my own, and elucidates to the point of comprehensibility even the most disagreeable proposals. I'm comfortable saying the book is unbiased, though it seems that the author was stretching to justify some of his indeterminists ideas.

The discussions of determinist and theological ideas are practically perfect. The arguments for both are laid out methodically and contextually. I generally reject most theological arguments, but this book presents them in a refreshingly sound way. The compatibilist arguments clearly lay out and alleviate every intuitive problem with the approach.

I did have some issues with some of the incompatibilist ideas towards the middle of the book. Though the author is generally more scrutinous of their holes, fallacies, and generalizations, he nonetheless uses a bit more hand-waving to describe these perspectives. For example, despite fleshing out the logical difficulty of ultimate responsibility, he seems to eventually forgive it by means of indeterminism (which in that case is a hand-wavy word for randomness).

That relates to the biggest hole I perceive in the book's reasoning. The materialist perspective it gives on incompatibilism rests most soundly on the idea of "parallel processing" in the brain. He claims that if the brain's processing works in a rather specific way that he proposes (namely, competing neural networks processing choices), AND if that process includes literal randomness (e.g. quantum uncertainty), then this would constitute a meaningful causa sui. He even mentions that this quantum uncertainty could be amplified to macroscopic scales by neurons (like a stochastic transistor). However, I feel he almost willfully (pun intended) ignored the possibility that this unpredictability could be due to chaos, rather than underlying randomness. Furthermore, I don't feel he justified that such randomness could bring justify a meaningful PAP or UR.

However, even in this disagreement, I think this was a hugely enriching book. By laying out so many arguments that relate in such obscure ways, whether each argument be right or wrong, Kane clarifies our definition and argumentative vocabulary for free will.

[Edwin Dalorzo · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book provides a comprehensive perspective on the subject with arguments in favor and against the most important theories and points of view on the highly debated matters of free will. In general, I enjoyed the book and it helped me understand the richness and complexity of the subject and its importance for our lives. However, reading a book like this from cover to cover is not enough to fully understand the nuances of every argument and point of view. At times I felt confused or got lost in paragraphs and paragraphs of argumentations with nuanced details that were hard to follow. So, the book is really good, as an overview, but it requires time to fully understand its contents, and probably additional efforts to grasp the essence of the knowledge in these pages.

[Matko · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent basic introduction to the contemporary Free Will debate. Robert Kane, one of leading libertarian philosophers of free will, lucidly and concisely, introduces the reader to all positions on the debate, and, what's most important and often a flaw of general introductory textbooks, which this author masterfully avoids, is that he's foremostly fair and nonobstrusive about his position. The only flaw is, in my opinion, a too short coverage of subject of God's foreknowledge and human free will, but it doesn't deter from the general impression about this great book. A recommended read for anyone interested about the question of Free Will.

[Aike · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a good introduction. Would recommend it to people who are interested in the different philosophical positions in the free will debate and know next to nothing about it. If you already have basic knowledge of Ethics and/or free will, this book is a nice summary, but in the end quite simplistic. I had to read it for a third year philosophy course; would have liked to read it in my first year of studying philosophy.
What I did think was good was that it didn't feel like the author was forcing his own opinions on me at every page. Chapter 11 though. What a joke, book would've been really worth the 4 stars without it.

[Franz · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fine introduction that is fluid in style and manages to communicate sometimes abstruse ideas very clearly. Given Kane's own views on free will, it may not be a surprise that he gives what I think is short shrift to deterministic views. His arguments for his own version of free will strike me as dubitable, as it is based on quantum mechanics in a way that physicists may not recognize. Though I am familiar with many of versions of free will he discusses, I still learned a great deal. Largely jargon free and accessible to general readers.

[Joel · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really liked this book although I do not share the author's position on the issue. Kane provides a fair discussion on the various positions related to the free will debate along with a discussion of problems associated with each position. He seems to take a libertarian position and defends it in later parts of the book as well as I have seen it defended anywhere (though I still don't buy it and find it largely incoherent).

[William Crosby · Rating 4 out of 5]

This doesn't look like the cover of the book I read, but I did not see the book I read listed. But it was titled "Free Will" and ed. by Robert Kane. Extensive variety of arguments: compatibilism, libertarianism, hard/soft determinism. These all interweave and are presented in more than usually lucid prose for philosophers.

[Rachael · Rating 5 out of 5]

I enjoyed this slim volume. The author is very good at presenting ideas clearly, without much jargon and does so in a compelling manner. The ins and outs of various arguments about what free will is and how determinism relates to it is definitely challenging.

[Stephen Austin · Rating 5 out of 5]

A quite outstanding introductory exposition. Possibly the free will debate is unusual in that competing positions can be described and distinguished with this kind of clarity and precision, but Kane has done a masterful job in mapping out the intellectual territory.

[probably · Rating 5 out of 5]

Free will is *the* most fascinating and profound topic of all philosophical debates. This amazing book, written with crystal clarity, is a great introduction. Its clear organization and comprehensive contents make me wonder how a book on philosophy can be written any better.

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

A must read to any readers with general philosophical interest in the topic of free-will vs. determinism. The author does a wonderful job explaining and clarifying one of the most most difficult and complex subject in an introduction, which is not an easy task but very difficult.

[Karate1kid · Rating 5 out of 5]

The best introduction to free will. If you want to understand the issues and find your way in this maze, it is the place to start. If you are looking for more, it will point you in the right direction.

[Bart · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great introduction!
Although free will and determinism are not my favorite subjects, this book introduces them very clearly and gives very good reading suggestions for each chapter, so that when you have to do further research for an essay, you know where to look for your sources.

[Justin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent introduction to the free will debate

[Will · Rating 5 out of 5]

A survey, with clear arguments on all sides.

[Michael Lumsdaine · Rating 5 out of 5]

Aside from some conspicuous typos, this book was great. It was engaging, thorough, and even handed and always looked at the dialogue surrounding and objections to any view it presented. Dr. Kane obviously has an excellent grasp of the material, and he presents many different perspectives in a consistent and compelling way. Though only an introduction, the book delves into a number of specifics.

[Moritz · Rating 3 out of 5]

Introduces the free will debate and the different viewpoints that exist within it. Quite elaborate introduction but the fairly dry content makes it serve better as a reference work than as a cover-to-cover read.

[Matt]

Great summary of discourse in free will and determinism, with analysis of the spectrum of arguments in all directions. As someone with no formal philosophy education, I found this text accessible.