Intro:

Free will is the philosophical concept that asks whether humans have the ability to make decisions freely and
independently, or if they are determined by external forces such as genetics, environment, or even destiny.
Some argue that our actions are predetermined by factors beyond our conscious control, while others believe
we have the capacity to choose our actions autonomously. This debate has been discussed for centuries in
philosophy, theology, and cognitive science.

On the other hand, the concept of "the end justifies the means" comes from ethical and political philosophy,
particularly associated with the thinking of Machiavelli. This idea suggests that the morality of an action is
determined by its final outcome or consequence, rather than the means used to achieve that outcome. In other
words, if the outcome is considered good or beneficial, then the means employed to reach that outcome can be
justified, even if they involve morally questionable actions.

The relationship between these two concepts is interesting. Some argue that if free will is an illusion and our
actions are determined by factors beyond our control, then the idea of moral responsibility becomes
problematic. In this context, the notion that "the end justifies the means" could be even more relevant, as
human actions would not result from conscious and free choice, but rather from forces beyond our
understanding or control.

However, others might argue that even if free will is an illusion, we can still apply ethical and moral
principles to our actions, and that the concept of "the end justifies the means" remains problematic due to its
implications regarding the justification of morally questionable actions.

Arguments:

Physical and neuroscientific determinism: Argument 1: The Libet experiment and advances in
neuroscience suggest that our decisions and actions are preceded by unconscious brain activity. This
implies that our seemingly conscious choices could be the result of brain processes over which we
have no conscious control. Argument 2: Newtonian physics and quantum physics posit a universe
governed by deterministic laws, where every action is determined by previous causes. If all our
actions are predetermined by these natural laws, then there is no room for truly free and
independent free will.
Freudian theory and neurological disorders: Argument 1: Freudian theory suggests that much of our
behavior is influenced by unconscious impulses and conflicts. This raises the possibility that our
decisions and actions are not entirely conscious or voluntary, but rather influenced by factors
beyond our conscious control. Argument 2: Neurological disorders, such as brain injuries or
neurodegenerative diseases, can significantly affect a person's ability to make decisions and control
their behavior. This suggests that our supposed freedom to choose and act may be limited by the
function and integrity of our brain, which is susceptible to biological and physical influences
beyond our consciousness and will.
Jeremy Bentham's Utilitarianism: Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that argues the best action is the
one that produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. From this perspective,
the end result is what matters, not the motives or means used to achieve it. Therefore, if free will
does not exist and our actions are determined by factors beyond our control, utilitarianism could
argue that we should focus on maximizing happiness, even if it involves using questionable
methods.
Examples from daily life:
Physical determinism: When you throw a ball into the air, its trajectory is determined by the laws of
physics. No matter how much you wish the ball to go in another direction, its movement is
predetermined by forces like gravity and the initial force you applied. In engineering and
technology, designers must consider physical laws when creating structures, devices, and systems.
For instance, engineers design bridges and buildings taking into account the materials' resistance
and the forces acting upon them.
Freudian theory: An individual may have unexpected or irrational emotional reactions in certain
situations due to subconscious impulses or conflicts of which they are not aware. During dream
analysis, a person may discover that their dreams reflect their desires, anxieties, and underlying
conflicts, according to Freudian theory.
Existentialist philosophy: A college student may feel overwhelmed by the responsibility of choosing
a career and the future ahead of them. This choice can be perceived as a burden, as it involves
decisions that will profoundly affect their life. An individual may feel anxious about the idea that
every decision they make defines their existence and the type of person they become, according to
Sartre's existentialist philosophy.
Biological determinism: Mental illnesses, like depression or schizophrenia (also Alzheimer or
Parkinson), may have a genetic component, suggesting that biological factors can influence a
person's mental and emotional state. Changes in cognition, memory, and motor function due to the
degeneration of brain cells. These changes can affect a person's ability to make decisions, recall past
events, or control their behavior appropriately.
Project Conclusion (Luz)

In concluding this project, it's clear that the debate over free will and the means used to achieve our
goals is complex and multifaceted.

On one hand, physical and neuroscientific determinism has been proposed, arguing that our actions
are determined by forces beyond our conscious control. Experiments like Libet's and our increasing
understanding of brain activity lead us to question the nature of our seemingly conscious decisions.
Additionally, Freudian theory and neurological disorders suggest that our thoughts and actions may
be influenced by subconscious and biological processes over which we have little control.
On the other hand, the idea that free will is a necessary illusion for our conception of moral
responsibility and human dignity has been defended. Existentialist philosophy, for example, argues
that we are responsible for our choices, even if they are influenced by external factors. Furthermore,
utilitarianism posits that the ends justify the means, implying that the morality of an action is
determined by its final outcome, not the means used to achieve it.
In my opinion, the debate over free will and the means is crucial for understanding our own nature
and the world around us. While it's tempting to seek definitive answers, reality appears to be more
nuanced and complex than we often wish. My personal conclusion is that even if free will may be
an illusion in some sense, we still have the capacity and responsibility to reflect on our actions and
strive to act in an ethical and morally justified manner, regardless of the forces that may influence
us.
Ultimately, this debate challenges us to consider not only what we do, but also why we do it and
how we do it. It prompts us to reflect on the nature of our own agency and responsibility in a
complex and ever-changing world.