Does free will exist or is it just an illusion people tend to believe? Free will is the ability of a person to perform what he or she wants without hindrances or constraints. According to this definition, so many assumptions exist questioning whether there is free will or not. For instance, morality of an action a person takes is vital. This is because a person cannot perform an immoral action due to the consequences that will follow. As a result, this is going to hinder or constrain free will of a person. It is because of this that scholars like Immanuel Kant give views or a position on the argument about free will of a person.
According to Kant’s views, three pillars exist for the purposes of defining free will. In this case, the first view was on the pillar of morality. Kant states that morality does not constrain a person’s decision in taking a certain action. This is because irrespective of how immoral an action can be, it is impossible to force a person not to perform the action. For this reason, Kant states that a person has free will in performing the actions he or she wishes. Therefore, when it comes to judgment, people are responsible for their own actions.
Freedom is another pillar where Kant states that people have the freedom to choose an action they want to perform. In this case, Kant states that it is not correct to separate or use determination against free will. According to determination, a person performs certain actions because of the repercussions of the actions. This means that a person can be forced to perform certain tasks without his or her own free will. However, Kant feels that this is not true, because it is really impossible for a person to perform what he or she does not want. For example, when a criminal goes to perform an immoral action, he or she knows the repercussion. In spite of this knowledge, the criminal continues with the action.
Immortality is another pillar of free will where Kant places strong views about this argument. The soul of a person tends to convey the characteristics of immortality. This means that the soul has free will to perform all the actions without hindrances or constraints. Therefore, Kant argues that it is because of such immortality of the soul that a person possesses free will to perform actions without constraint.
Finally, after providing a view about free will using the pillars, Kant provides an argument of how people should perform justice in a court of law in dealing with immorality. In this case, Kant suggests that justice should focus on the action and not the characteristics of the person who committed the action. This is because a person does not justify his or her actions because of the availability of free will. Therefore, Kant views that free will is not subjected to any conditions or determinations.
Kant has a strict view about free will. According to Kant, free will is not subjected to any conditions. However, he agrees that there are implications to the actions a person makes. In this case, these actions may contain moral implications either negative or positive. It is because of this Kant argues that people should view what is happening before a person is committing the action. In this instance, a person has a choice in relation to the actions he or she would take. In this moment, a person has free will to choose the decision to take, because he or she does not have any constraints.