After reading Kane’s article about free will, I am thoroughly impressed with his proposal of self-forming actions. According to Kane, there are certain actions in our history (SFAs) in which we could have done otherwise that have formed our present character. Kane argues that these essential decisions help form the people we are today. I think that Kane’s argument is an effective alternative to determinism. Personally, I find it difficult to believe in a world in which all of our actions are predetermined and controlled. I believe, like Kane, that our past decisions and experiences create who we are today and that we base our current decisions off of these experiences. One key aspect point that Kane makes is that free action is not the same as free will. Many arguments center around the question “could he/she have made a different choice?”, but that does not encompass all of free will. Free will is the ability to form ourselves, our wishes, wants, and motivation and purposes. Kane’s theory does a very good job of explaining this view of free will. In my opinion, this is why Kane’s explanation is better than others we have read; it covers all of free will and addresses the internal aspects-motivation and purpose. In addition, Kane notes that actions must be voluntary; involuntary actions or accidents are not the same as free will. This distinction seems important to me; yet, other theories don’t seem to address it. Overall, I think that Kane’s proposal of SFAs and indeterminism is a very plausible explanation of free will.
I had the same thoughts about Kane’s theory. Once he addressed the need for Ultimate Responsibility (UR), it seemed like it was just as crucial to having free will as Alternate Possibilities (AP). His theory provides a mostly fool-proof explanation of how we can have free will through self-forming actions.
I agree with your post mostly, Genevieve: determinism does not seem very plausible, and Kane’s theory is much more easier to accept. However, I would like to pose this question: with SFA, do we really have complete freedom of action? For example, here in the U.S. we were predetermined, to an extent, to be born in stability, unlike the millions of children in Africa. We clearly did not face the same choices as they did, limiting the strength of the SFA argument.
Jonah: The idea of SFAs in different areas is an interesting point that I hadn’t thought of before. Perhaps it is a universal idea that we face SFAs in our life and these help to develop our character. However the actual SFAs that we encounter may vary drastically. Going off your idea of being born into a privileged or underprivileged area, I’ve tried to make two scenarios. Someone from the privileged environment may have to make the SFA of what major to pursue in college. Someone from an underprivileged area who does not have the resources for further education may have to decide between gang life or working a low income job. Thus it may be possible to conclude that there is a kind of pre-determined cultural relativism when it comes to the SFAs we will face.