Why descartes ideas on free will is better than plato’s

Why Descartes’ Concept of The Free Will Is Better Than Plato’s

In regarding the question of free will, René Descartes held the idea that free will was God-given gift, and every man has the option to exercise their free will in either doing what is right or wrong. According to Descartes in his book Discourse on Method and Meditations on

First Philosophy in Meditations 4, he states that God is perfect and gave us everything for a good

reason and cause, and that God can only give us good things because he is perfect himself and is

incapable of granting anything bad at all. On the other hand, Plato makes the argument that a

person can only achieve free will after they master their base desires. In book four of Gorgias,

Plato describes free will as self-mastery. He further argues that one can overcome the limitations

imposed by passion; hence for one to get justice they need to free themselves from the bondage

of their desires. According to Plato, freedom is the self-mastery an individual obtains through

courage, wisdom, and temperance, enabling one to be free from the tyranny of basic desires and

instead aim for the pursuit of the good.

Descartes talks about the freedom that is in the will of people. There is freedom in many

of the notions that are innate in people. And that free will isn’t something to achieve by resisting

temptation, it is infact a God-given gift that belongs to everyone. Plato’s argument for free will

only being accessible to a few can be ill-suited for today. People might interpret his argument for

being that free will is almost an unfair notion that is only given to elite people who have had the

chance to conquer their desires. And that free-will is not given to the average person still trying

to figure life out. Descartes’ argument for the equal distribution of free will gives a more

well-rounded argument for that it belongs to everyone regardless of your state in life.

Plato and Descartes clearly differed in their interpretations of free will. However, Plato’s

rhetorical ideas on free will were misguided in that he thinks not everyone has free will. This is

clearly not true because in our understanding, everyone has the right to do as they wish. The

entirety of human civilization depends on the free will of individuals. Without free will, it would

be hard for humanity to sustain its current society because people will be engrossed in routine,

and creativity will be impossible. Therefore Through Descartes’ belief that everyone has access

to free will and his lingering reasoning for philosophers to continue the search for truth,

Descartes proved his view on free will to be more convincing and better integrated into society

today.

To begin with, Plato approaches the subject of Free Will in Gorgias by insisting that

choices in people were influenced by their desires. Plato emphasized that people often battled

with their base desires, which deprived them of their free will, because they were limited to a

few options, either giving in to their desires or doing anything they possibly could to avoid

falling into their passions. In book IV of his dialogue, he posits about how man strives for “inner

justice,” often battling within themselves with their basic desires and passions. The only way an

individual can achieve inner achievement is through conquering their base desires. People can do

this by acquiring virtues of wisdom, courage, and temperance. Plato insisted that the only path to

free will in a person was possible once they had mastered their own self. In his writing, he did

not believe that free will existed for all people. His idea of free will was that it was only

accessible to those that could control their passions.

“Will not the good man, who says whatever he says with a view to the best, speak

with a reference to some standard and not at random; just as all other artists, whether the

painter, the builder, the shipwright, or any other look all of them to their own work, and

do not select and apply at random what they apply, but strive to give a definite form to

it?” (Plato)**

Plato held the idea that the beliefs of a person were determined by the person’s idea of

what was good. He also argued that the person’s knowledge primarily guided a person’s

impression of what was good. Therefore, it is not possible for people to act against their

knowledge. Even though Plato never mentions free will in his rhetoric, we can argue that his take

on morality and mastering one’s actions were aimed at the struggles people have with free will.

In fact, one can argue Plato argued against free will. Before attaining self-mastery, one has to

deny themselves the most basic of his desires, which implies that a person has to restrict their

will. In achieving self-mastery, one does not attain free will. Instead, one becomes free of their

choice, and one can act according to how one desires. While it seems like achieving self-mastery

would imply that one had obtained free will, mastery over self also means that a person restricts

themselves from engaging in certain activities. For instance, if free will denotes that a person

was free to engage in whatever action they deemed fit, wouldn’t that imply that they were free to

do what they want.

Further, Plato’s point posits that people cannot do what they want if they haven’t mastered

themselves because their desires will often be substantial. Hence, Plato argues that people will

have obtained the ultimate free will through mastery of self. Not only will they be able to

overcome their desires, but they will also have mastered their choice, which means that they will

be able to resist any desires and temptations.

The psychological concepts of free will, according to Plato, are concerned mainly with

the notions of the “soul”. Plato argues that a person’s soul can attain inner justice if the person

can distinguish between good and evil using his knowledge. The moral capability is determined

by the ability the individual has and how they choose to use the command. Therefore, people can

have free will if the knowledge they have can be used for perpetrating upright moral values and

judgments. Yet this is clearly proven to be incorrect as if people only have free will to act upon

moral and correct actions, there wouldn’t be space for sinning, and humans are known to be born

with original sin and through actions such as murder, rape, or terrorism, there proves that free

will does exist without self-mastery.

In Meditations, Descartes proved a more compelling case for free will. He has the idea

that everything must have a reason and a cause. He determined that free will had two aspects.

The first one was the will of people to do as they pleased, and the second one was the power of

self-determination. Descartes described the physical world as a deterministic machine. However,

he viewed the ideas and thoughts as free, and he argued that they could be used to change things

in the material world. Descartes argues that, by doubting ourselves, we express the freedom that

is freely given to us by the creator. Descartes argues that our acts are born not of necessity, but

we choose to engage in most of them freely.

“And thus, the actions of life often not allowing any delay, it is a truth very certain that, when it

is not in our power to determine the most true opinions we ought to follow the most probable.”

(Descartes)

Another point Descartes makes about free will is that God gave it to us. He argues that

God preordained everything because he has immeasurable power that many people regard as

impious. He also makes the contradiction that we cannot do anything that God did not already

ordain. There may exist great difficulties when people try to reconcile the divine preordination of

God and the freedom of their will. Descartes describes that it is possible, though, for people to

negotiate the independence of their will and that God has preordained all their actions. These

difficulties can be removed if people embrace the fact that their minds are finite, while the power

of God is infinite. By this accord, Descartes implies that God already knows what can be and

what cannot be. He also argues that we have the freedom within us to know and understand our

limitations. By failing to grasp a concept which people do not understand or doubting something

that people know is beyond their comprehension is absurd because, by the idea of free will,

people are not only aware of the freedom that lies within them, but they are also aware of the

limitations that are imposed by their thinking. Therefore, it would be absurd for people to argue

against free will because of their own rules.

He also makes the argument that people engage in wrongdoings because of free will.

Even though people do not want to go wrong, the free will within them causes them to engage in

activities that may be considered morally questionable. Descartes argues that there is a

fundamental difference when people decide to do what is wrong and consent to their thoughts.

Most people inherently do not wish to engage in acts that may be considered inaccurate or

morally questionable. However, there is a more significant deal of consideration that has to be

put in place before one assent to something that may eventually cause an error. He makes the

arguments that some specific events and actions culminate towards the one bad thing that people

do not wish to do, but because of the limitations of the mind and our inability to foresee future

events, there is no way that people can determine the likelihood that some events will likely lead

them into doing the wrong thing. In the eagerness of people to find the truth, they are often not

aware of the proper method that will prevent them from engaging in morally questionable acts.

Descartes associated and equated freedom with the uncertainty of the mind, and he equated the

body with determinism. Our thoughts and actions are influenced by the ideas people have and

how they let the thoughts dictate their lives.

“. . .it is not my design to teach the method that everyone must follow in order to use his reason

properly, but only to show the way in which I have tried to use my own.”

Descartes argues that judgments cannot be made based on things or which people do not

understand. Thus, he argues that conclusions cannot be made by knowledge. However, with free

will, a person is free to make judgments as they see fit. His arguments lie on one of his principles

that free will extends further intelligence. Descartes posits on the question of errors, and he

makes the argument that errors are the fault of people. As such, he determines that free will

exceeds intelligence because if it was limited, and there were restrictions on free will, then it

wouldn’t be a free choice.

Plato argues that free will can only be obtained through knowledge and mastery of self.

Even though he does not directly reference free will, it is implied that free will is something that

people have to achieve. On the other hand, Descartes argues that God gives free will, and it is

universal rather than a quality that a person has to obtain. He argues that it is universal, and it

cannot be limited or restricted. These restrictions, he argues, are only present in the minds of

people.

Plato opines that a person’s base desires impose the limitation to free will, and unless one

learns to control their base desires and passions, they will never achieve free will. On the other

hand, Descartes argues that the limitations on free will can only be imposed by a person’s mind.

In other words, he makes the argument that everyone is capable of free will if they decide not to

limit their own free will.

One other difference is Plato’s idea that free will is not for everyone, and it is only

achieved by denying oneself their basic desires. In other words, Plato argued that free will was

almost non-existent unless by sheer will of the individual. While Plato argued on the

impossibilities of attaining free will, Descartes made the argument that free will was created by

God, which means that it is not something that has to be achieved, but rather, it is an inherent gift

from God that has to be used and embraced by everyone. According to Descartes, free will

cannot be attained or achieved because it is freely given by God. He makes the distinction

against Plato’s take on free will, that, if it was something that had to be achieved by merit, it

wouldn’t be considered free will because it would imply that a person was limited only by the

factors that pertain to their free will. According to Descartes, free will is paramount, regardless

of what a person thinks.

“My third maxim was to endeavor always to conquer myself rather than fortune, and change my

desires rather than the order of the world, and in general, accustom myself to the persuasion that,

except our own thoughts, there is nothing absolutely in our power; so that when we have done

our best in things external to us, all wherein we fail of success is to be held, as regards us,

absolutely impossible: and this single principle seemed to me sufficient to prevent me from

desiring for the future anything which I could not obtain, and thus render me contented”

(Descartes)

While Plato constructed his ideas through dialogue, Descartes made some of his

statements based off his mathematical calculations and his own thoughts. Descartes developed

most of his ideas from his own thoughts when he was thinking about the nature of his existence.

At last, through __