What comes first – morality or free will?

שו”ת › Category: philosophy › What comes first – morality or free will?

asked 1 year ago

As far as I understand, it is impossible to believe in valid and objective morality without assuming that a person has free will (and therefore believing in dualism), which allows him the freedom to choose and bear moral responsibility for his actions.
But one of the big reasons for assuming that we have free will (and a soul) is to allow us to continue to hold the view that man is morally responsible for his actions (at least that’s how I remember you presenting it in your book on free will). This sounds a bit circular (although it isn’t), but it makes the evidence for the existence of valid morality or free will much weaker.
In any case – which assumption precedes what? Is it because you believe in dualism/that there is free will (mainly because of intuition), that you can more easily move to the next assumption – that there is morality, or is it because you want to continue to engage in a discourse of valid morality, that you are forced to assume that there is also dualism/free will?

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

0 Answers

0 Vote Up Vote Down

מיכי Staff answered 1 year ago

It is intuitively clear to me that I have free will. I have no evidence for this. It is a rudimentary intuition. It is also clear to me that I have a soul. There is no need for evidence for that either. It is a primary intuition. These two come in parallel. There is no first and later here. Someone who only has the first intuition can of course use it as evidence for the second (the second is not evidence for the first, so your question is simply not logically correct. It is possible to have a deterministic soul without choice). Since these are my initial intuitions, the burden of proof is on whoever claims otherwise. Therefore, he is the one who needs to provide evidence, not me.

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

S.E replied 1 year ago

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. The question was about *morality* and free will. The question is whether the reason to believe in free will is so that it fits with your moral conception – or vice versa: whether the reason to believe in valid morality is my intuition of free will.
(Of course, deterministic dualism is possible. What I mentioned about dualism is just to emphasize that there is another conclusion here – that free will requires dualism, and therefore this is another necessary conclusion from belief in objectively binding morality)

מיכי Staff replied 1 year ago

You were completely clear and I answered all of this in my previous answer. You are just repeating the same thing and I see no point in repeating what I said again.