Truman Show- Freewill and determinism

Truman show is the movie that shows entire Truman's life. Truman lives in the world that is created by Christof, the director of Truman show.In the movie, Truman is given freedom within the world that is created for him. When we look at him from the outside of his world, he is forced to live within the enormous set of stage.

There might be theological challenge to Truman's freedom. In the movie, Christof acts as a God to Truman. He created the world for Truman, sets time, rises sun, and decides his family etc. He is always looking at Truman as God does. Therefore, Truman is not free because Christof can control Truman's action by changing his world which God can only do.

There might be scientific challenge to Truman's freedom. According to scientific challenge, everything that happens in nature has a cause. In the movie, the world is created by Christof which caused Truman to act in typical ways such as looking for truth, and lover. And Christof made this movie to entertain people which is another cause. Like this, every cause is chained to other cause.

In my opinion, Truman is free, because he does everything he wants. For example, he eats whatever he wants, he tries to find the woman he loves and he even seeks to find the truth. He can do everything that he wants within that world. According to compatibilism, he is free, because it's his desire to seek his lover and truth. He wants to love that woman and wants to know what the real truth is, so as compatibilist says that free act is an event caused by person's intention caused by an inner state of that person such as desire, Truman is actually free.

Agency theory would also say that Truman is free, but they would explain it differently. Agency theory believes that free action is an act caused by an agent. In the movie, the action and decision Truman make are free because Truman himself is intelligent being and therefore an agent. As agency theory believe that every event has cause, even though there is cause that triggered Truman to act in a certain way, his action is considered as free.

However, I think Truman is only free in the view of Truman, himself. When we try to analyze in the view of audience, Truman is not free at all. According to scientific determinists, a free action is an event having to do with a person's intentions that is without a cause. In this case, the world Truman lives in is created by Christof, which means he is the cause of how Truman acts and lives. He is the one that determines the life of Truman. And as the principle of universal causality says everything has cause and every cause is event, there is no freedom for human. Therefore Truman is not free at all in the view of audience.

Milgram Experiment

Through Milgram's experiment, we can see what kind of an action agency theory believes as a free action. Agency theory believes that a free act is an act caused by an agent. In this experiment, the one who is commanding to continue the experiment acts as an agent, so in this case, his commands and pressure are becoming the cause for the person who is causing electric shock. Therefore, people who believe in agency theory would say that person who is causing electric shock is actually free, because the action is caused by an agent. However, agency theory would not fully agree with the principle of universal causality, because they believe that every event has a cause, but not in a causal chain with a very long history. Also when we compare Agency theory with scientific determinists, they, scientific determinists, would not agree that person who is causing shock is actually free, because they define free action as an event without a cause. But then as unversal causality says everything is caused by cause, person's action in this experiment is not free. Same as determinists, indeterminists would also say that this man is not free, becuase there was a cause which is commander, who caused him to cause electric shock. However, compatibilist would say that the action is free because this action was caused by an inner state of that person, or decision to act.

When we sum all these up, we can see that this man was actually free according to the Agency theory. However, we can't judge whether he was ethical or not because even though he was free, he was ordered to give an electric shot. With the agency theory, he would unethical as this was his freewill. However, in reality, it would be hard to judge whether he is ethical or not.

Question 9

I don't think we actually have "freewill". Our actions are always caused by other events. For example, when I choose what to wear, I won't choose something very odd, because I certainly know that this is out of fashion. So at this point, the fashion trend is determining what I would wear. Therefore as this choice was not my sole will, I can't say I was free to choose. I might say I was forced to choose. Also, because of our instict, we might not be free. For example, when we are hungry, we automatically look for food. It's not that I'm brainstorming whether to eat or not, but I'm just following my instinct, which is not my freewill. Therefore, in our life, I don't think I have freewill, but we choose something that is already determined.

Cartoon about libertarian view

http://goanimate.com/movie/0t4TWvdl2w2A?utm_source=linkshare&uid=0_j1_aN60wes

The cost benefit analysis in the view of utilitarian

I think utilitarian would support the education of K-12 because the side of benefit outweighs the cost of education. As utilitarian supports something that would bring people happiness, they definitely would support going to school. Going to school requires consuming a lot of money, however, when we see the later effect of having education, people are able to get much more money than the money they have spent before by getting better job and earning more money. Then this would bring happiness to themselves, and even to the government and countries. As country has a lot of educated people, it would help country develop economically, socially, and politically. Eventually this would bring happiness to all the citizens of the country which is the reason why untilitarians would support the compulsory education of K-12.

On the other hand, this idea might ignore people's right and freedom to choose what they want. Some people might not want to get education, because they think that as waste of time. Also some people simply might not have enough money to afford, so the idea of utilitarian would ignore the individual right. Also the time, or friends cannot be considered as costs. These things can't be given values.

Cost-benefit analysis of going to school.

Tangible Costs

Tangible Benefits

l  The tuition fee and extra additional fees such as donation or registration fee  l  Money spent for transportation   l  Money spent for extra materials for the class such as notebooks, pencils, or uniforms l  Money spent for extracurricular program such as sports team. l  Money spent for the injuries that are gotten from P.E class or other sports.

l  The money you will earn later when you get a better job with the education. l  By having education and getting grades, it might reduce the tuition fee for the colleges by getting scholarship. l  By getting education, even though students don’t go for further education, they can get basic jobs. They will better off then those who have no education at all. l  Students can use all the facilities for free in the school l  Students are able to get basic, practical knowledge such as computer or speech skills.

Intangible Costs

Intangible Benefits

l   15 years of time will be spent for the education while it can be used to do other things. l   A lot of efforts are needed to complete 15 year of education. l   Students have to try to fit themselves in the school society. l   Student might know the wider range of bad things in school by interacting with friends. l   There might be problem of bullying.

l   They will be able to improve the socializing ability by interacting with different kinds of people. l   Students are able to learn basic norms and values of society which will make them sociable and suitable in the real outside society. l   By working together with friends during school years, students can learn how to cooperate each other. l   By being educated, student might get into better colleges and eventually getting better reputation. l   Students might have special experience such as camping or having field trip with friends.

Sep. 14, assignment

They said that I was not being consistent at all, because I answer it's moral to kill for the first and third scneario, but immoral for the second one. It said, that there would be a question with my response that why it would be immoral for second scenario, while the structure, sacrificing a person for saving three lives, is similar with third scenario. Also they said that my responses are out of line, because if outcome is something that is counted, then second scenario also should be moral.

However, my opinion is a bit different. I chose first scenario to be moral, because it's not quite moral to let younger people exposed to cruel death. It's just better to make them die comfortably. Also they won't really have ability to make better decision at that age. That's why I chose it to be moral. However, for the second scenario, sailers were being selfish. Even though he was going be dead, they didn't have any right to kill a innocent boy. Tom dudley didn't even have determined mind, but he asked to another sailer whether he has to kill him for their survival, so in that situation, killing was done for their benefits. That's why I chose it to be immoral. The third scenario was quite similar to the second one, but the forth man was going to die in some minutes, while other three men were going to die in seconds. Therefore I thought that it would be more wise choice for forth person to sacrifice to save other men.