The Importance of Every Choice

Filed under: Misc, Philosophy — Jeremy at 9:41 pm on Wednesday, July 19, 2006

In talking about free will and moral responsibility, one of the ideas that comes to surface again and again is that what we do is in some way determined by who we are - that is, the type of character we have. Further, some would say that we can only be truly free and morally responsible if what we do flows naturally and determinately from our characters. As an illustration, Martin Luther is famously quoted as saying, after refusing to recant of his published ideas that helped launch the reformation, “Here I stand. I can do no other.” Many think we should here take his statement literally, presuming that he meant that his character and what he believed literally made it impossible for him to recant.

If this is really how our characters affect our decisions, then a regress argument can be developed to show that we are never really free or responsible (Galen Strawson is one well-known defender of this type of argument). Suppose Bob performs some action and it is free because it naturally follows from his character. We may well form the question at this point, ‘But where did his character come from?’ Obviously, if someone or something else were responsible for his character, and his character determines his action, he doesn’t seem truly free. Intuitively, the answer seems to be that his character has been developed by his previous actions and choices. But these choices surely must have been free, and that means that if we look at any particular of those actions, they would have been determined by his character at that point. But where did his character come from at those points? Presumably, by other free actions. But what about those? The infinite regress should be clear.

One way out of the regress is given by Robert Kane. Although Kane concedes that many if not most of our free actions are determined by our characters, he argues that there must be actions that we do at key points in our lives which are not determined by our characters. Rather, these actions were ones for which there were genuine alternative possibilities and which actually contribute to the formation of our characters, which in turn determine certain future actions. These he calls self-forming actions (SFAs).

Philosophically speaking, I am generally inclined to think that for almost all of our morally significant choices we have genuine alternative possibilities, but I agree that our characters at least greatly affect our probabilities to do certain actions and may even limit the number of possibilities we have. I also think there is something to the claim that our actions form our characters and who we are. Reflecting on this has led me from the abstract to the intensely practical, as I realized recently something seemingly obvious and which I had heard many times before, but which never really set in - every single choice I make affects the type of person I am and will become. Thinking of this in times of temptation has greatly helped me recently. We often trick ourselves into thinking that any one individual wrong choice can be quickly and easily atoned for and doesn’t matter much. But the truth is that every single choice we make is important in forming who we are and taking us either further down the path of godliness or further away from it.

4 Comments »

Pingback by Molinism » Character Formation

July 23, 2006 @ 8:14 pm

[…] Jeremy has a good post up in which he briefly explores the nature of morally significant human choices. He writes: In talking about free will and moral responsibility, one of the ideas that comes to surface again and again is that what we do is in some way determined by who we are - that is, the type of character we have. Further, some would say that we can only be truly free and morally responsible if what we do flows naturally and determinately from our characters. […]

Comment by Johnny-Dee

July 24, 2006 @ 5:14 pm

Good post, Jeremy! I have a few points that I would like to add. I think libertarians can deny this regress two different ways, and both seem plausible to me. First, many libertarians are among those who deny, “we can only be truly free and morally responsible if what we do flows naturally and determinately from our characters.” After all, someone might act completely out of one’s character, but still remain free and responsible for that action. Imagine if in a courtroom all we had to prove in order to prove someone was acting outside of one’s freedom and responsibility was that the action was out of accord with the defendant’s character! (Obvious more needs to be said here, but I hope you can see what I’m getting at.)

Second, one could follow Kane (who is actually following Aristotle), and say that all actions we are free/responsible for performing must originate from some choice made solely by that person. This is his “Ultimate Responsibility” thesis. If the regress of causes that explain some choice terminates outside the causal powers of the person making the choice, then I think the one has a strong case for denying that the person is free or responsible for the choice.

Comment by Jeremy

July 25, 2006 @ 6:41 pm

Johnny-Dee (and Simon),
Thanks for your comments. I actually think I would take the first route out that you mention. I tend to lean toward some form of agent causation and am definitely a libertarian. Kane’s full view of freedom, although interesting, seems to be very strange once you get into it. Since the point of the blog was actually more practical, I didn’t get much into my philosophical views (perhaps I should in another post).

Comment by Dave

July 31, 2006 @ 9:12 am

You make a very helpful and valid point about how character is determined by choices. I too am often guilty of thinking of my choices in isolation, as if I can just change gears at any time in my life. Unfortunately, I think libertarian views of free will tend to encourage this mistaken notion, for if we do possess libertarian freedom, then we can, at least at some times, reverse couse. A determinist view, however, really does encourage the notion that “every single choice we make is important in forming who we are and taking us either further down the path of godliness or further away from it.”

Cheers!

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>