Chapter 1: The Concept of Free Will in Ancient Philosophy

The discourse surrounding free will has long captivated ancient philosophers, yet explicit references to the term itself are scarce. The notion of free will emerged significantly later, but its foundational concepts—determinism, libertarianism, and compatibilism—have been discussed for over two millennia.

Before delving deeper into these philosophical discussions, it is essential to clarify the terms involved, as they form the bedrock of the debate on choice.

1. Determinism asserts that all events, including moral decisions, are predetermined by preceding causes, implying that individuals cannot act contrary to these influences.
2. Libertarianism, in the context of free will, posits that free will cannot coexist with causal determinism, thereby affirming that individuals possess genuine free will.
3. Compatibilism suggests that free will and determinism can coexist, allowing for the belief in both without contradiction.

With these definitions in mind, we can explore the ancient discussions surrounding the concept of choice.

Section 1.1: Plato’s Perspective on Free Will

In his renowned work, The Republic, Plato addresses themes of justice and the nature of the ideal city-state, primarily through the character of Socrates.

In Book IV, he outlines the facets of the human soul, arguing that a wise individual seeks 'inner justice.' According to Plato, one must conquer base desires to achieve this inner justice, acquiring virtues such as wisdom, courage, and temperance along the way. Only after mastering oneself can one genuinely express free will.

While Plato does not explicitly mention free will, it can be inferred that he implies its existence through the idea of self-mastery. He suggests that if one fails to overcome base desires, they remain enslaved to their emotions, inhibiting their capacity for free decision-making. Notably, Plato distinguishes these emotions from the self, resembling the concept of an external disruptive force—an idea foundational to Stoicism, which we will explore later.

Section 1.2: Aristotle’s Take on Choice and Free Will

Unlike Plato, Aristotle places significant value on the cultivation of virtues but does not assert that one must achieve inner justice to avoid being a slave to oneself. Though he refrains from endorsing a definitive stance on free will, he emphasizes the importance of choice.

In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle argues that individuals possess the power to choose whether to act or refrain from action. He believes that the essence of these choices lies within the individual.

Mature humans, he notes, deliberate on possible actions and decide based on personal experiences and beliefs. Over time, these choices shape habits, leading individuals to develop either virtuous or vicious characters. Importantly, at no point are they devoid of control over their decisions.

The Hellenistic Era: Evolving Concepts of Free Will

During the Hellenistic Era, the ideas of Plato and Aristotle were further developed by groups such as the Epicureans, Stoics, and Academic Skeptics. The debates among these schools of thought were vibrant and often contentious.

Zeno of Citium, the founder of Stoicism, expanded on Aristotle’s concept of causation, positing that every event has a cause, and given identical circumstances, the same cause will always lead to the same effect.

Zeno of Citium asserted, "It is impossible that the cause be present yet that of which it is the cause not obtain."

However, Chrysippus, another Stoic philosopher, sought to modify this deterministic view, advocating for the possibility of free will. He aimed to strengthen the argument for moral responsibility, asserting that while the past is immutable, future events could also depend on individual choices.

Chrysippus maintained that our actions, while determined, are not fated in a way that strips individuals of agency. He argued for a model wherein actions are influenced by both self-agency and divine foreknowledge, thus creating a form of early compatibilism.

The Views of Epicurus and Alexander of Aphrodisias

While Epicurus proposed that all things, including the human soul, are composed of atoms governed by fixed laws, he diverged from strict determinism. He introduced the notion of 'swerve,' suggesting that atoms could deviate from their paths, potentially indicating a belief in free will. However, the lack of clarity in Epicurus' writings leaves much open to interpretation.

Alexander of Aphrodisias, a prominent commentator on Aristotle, distinguished himself as a proponent of libertarianism, asserting that humans are accountable for self-caused decisions. He rejected the Stoic idea of foreknowledge, emphasizing that decisions are not always preordained.

Conclusion: The Divergent Views on Free Will

Throughout ancient philosophy, varying schools of thought offered different perspectives on the capacity for free will. Both Plato and Aristotle provide ambiguous insights, with Plato suggesting that free will may exist only for those who achieve enlightenment, while Aristotle emphasizes individual choice without the necessity of achieving inner justice.

In contrast, the Stoics adhered to a deterministic worldview, asserting that natural laws governed all, including the mind. Zeno’s principle that every event has a cause could lead to feelings of apathy regarding personal agency. To counter this, Chrysippus proposed a synthesis of determinism and libertarianism, suggesting that while choices may be determined, they are not entirely fated.

For further insights on this topic, watch:

Determinism vs Free Will: Crash Course Philosophy #24

Explore the intricacies of determinism and free will in this engaging video, which delves into the philosophical arguments surrounding choice and agency.

In addition, consider:

PHILOSOPHY - Metaphysics: The Problem of Free Will [HD]

This video discusses the philosophical dilemmas surrounding free will, examining the implications of metaphysical beliefs on human choice.

This article is part of the Free Will Series by Dr. Matt. To continue following this series, feel free to subscribe for updates. Ultimately, the choice is yours—unless, of course, it’s not.