• Korean Journal of Cognitive Science
• /
• v.24 no.3
• /
• pp.237-270
• /
• 2013

Determinism and compatibilism have thought that libertarianism contradicts the scientific view. This paper demonstrates that the hypothesis that free will exists does not cause any problems and contradictions, while maintaining pro-scientific view. Rather, determinism lacks scientific and demonstrative bases. At first, I reject dualistic self by assuming identity theory of the self and physical body & brain. Free will is a functional concept or property that can have multiple realization. Therefore we can recognize whether aliens or robots have free will through observation on their acts. 'Free will' is a functional kinds term like 'digestion'. As we know we have digestive function, we can know that we have free will even before knowing the necessity of its existence by understanding micro structure of human free will. The judgement that an individual has free will function depends on whether it has particular actions. Those actions are controlling and restraining actions in context, predicting future, making elaborate conditional sentences, etc. Real being of free will is the physical occupant of the function that makes those actions. Determinism is based on various kinds of misconceptions and misunderstandings. Determinists often confuse necessity of physical law and determinism. Another decisive misunderstanding is that free will postulates same conditions and different results from the same point of time. However, free will postulates that the two points of time are different. Because determinism is unnecessary redundant hypothesis influenced by religions, according to Ockham's Razor, determinism should be eliminated.

• Korean Journal of Forensic Psychology
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.35-51
• /
• 2021

People's belief in free will is important in determining the causes and responsibilities of human behavior. Over the past decades, there has been debate about belief in free will in the fields of neuroscience, philosophy, ethics, and criminal law. The Free Will and Determinism Scale (FAD-Plus; Paulhus & Carey, 2011) is a test tool that measures the components related to the belief in an individual's free will. This study conducted a confirmatory factor analysis of 1,000 ordinary people of various age groups and socio-economic backgrounds based on previous studies that conducted an exploratory factor analysis (Study 1). The author has secured the reliability and validity of a number of measures. Furthermore, it was examined how the sub-item of the FAD-Plus scale, 'belief in free will,' was related to correspondence bias and locus of control (Study 2). As a result of analyzing a total of 83 subjects, high belief in free will had a positive correlation with punishment judgment for negative behavior and internal attribution, but there was no significant relationship in reward judgment for positive behavior. Based on the study results, it was proven that the FAD-Plus is valid for the general public as well, and the relationship between belief in free will, attribution bias, locus of control and behavior judgment was examined. The limitations of this study, policy implications, and research directions are discussed.

• Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issue
• /
• v.29 no.1
• /
• pp.101-123
• /
• 2023

As an effort to further extend the existing understanding on the Psychology of Working Theory, this study examined gender differences in the paths to the attainment of decent work with Korean emerging adults. A total of 311 South Korean employees (mean age = 25.96, men = 94, women = 217) completed online questionnaires. We found that economic constraints inversely predicted work volition and career adaptability, which were positively relatedin turn, led to decent work. The overall indirect effect of work volition and career adaptability between economic constraints and decent work was significant., hHowever, the specific indirect effect of work volition and career adaptability was not significant. Further analyses showed a gender difference in the paths. Specifically, economic constraint was significantly negatively associated with work volition, and work volition predicted decent work only for women, but not for men. Moreover, economic constraint was significantly inversely associated with career adaptability, and career adaptability positively predicted decent work only for men, but not for women. Work volition mediated between economic constraints and decent work for women, while career adaptability had a mediating effect for men. It suggests that career resources for obtaining a decent work may be distinctive by genderdifferent groups.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.145
• /
• pp.325-350
• /
• 2018

The overemphasis of the priority of reason over will runs the risk of resulting in intellectual determinism. On the contrary, it is also unfair to underestimate the role of reason in Saint Thomas Aquinas' theory of the free will to avoid intellectual determinism. For, according to Thomas, "the will inclines to the good, insofar as it is an appetite, and it follows the judgment of the reason in the pursuit of the good, insofar as it is a 'rational' appetite." It is the objective of this article to show that, for Thomas, the idea of the free will is not contradictory to that of the will's following the judgment of reason. For this purpose, it is decisive to adequately evaluate the role of reason in Thomas's theory of the free will. This article therefore proves that in principle Thomas argues the priority of the will over reason as well as the freedom of the will, and that he nevertheless recognizes the role of reason which precedes the choice of the will by making the second-level judgment even when the will chooses not to follow the first-level judgement of reason. It is entirely up to the will to follow the judgement and order of reason or not. It explains the freedom of the will. But 'not to follow reason' is contradictory to the essential determination of the will as the 'rational' appetite. For from the will's not following reason, wrong-doing follows; the human act which does not conform to reason. This article therefore argues that for Thomas, the 'true' liberty of the will corresponding to its determination as the rational appetite consists in its following the rule and order of reason, not in acting against the judgement of reason.

• Trans-
• /
• v.4
• /
• pp.65-86
• /
• 2018

In this paper, I chose one of various agenda for life in a philosophical film world view and explored the core of dialectical relation between free will and responsibility. Freedom and responsibility, Existential and inferiority, etc, The conflict of humanity on the crisis of faith have been A comparative study based on the discussions of East Asian religious philosophy and Western philosophy. Including compare the three commonalities and differences with Jean Paul Sartre's 'subjectivity ideology due to the existence of free will' on existentialism in contemporary Western philosophy and The theory of the 'moral autonomy originating in the good will' of the Enlightenment philosopher Immanuel Kant and Concept of 'consciousness' of the life essence of Keiji Nishitani Based on the analysis of the film. In addition, the problem of free will in the viewpoint of nature, along with the individual's point of view, is comprehensively supplemented by the idea of the "nothingness" of the philosopher Zhuang Zhou. A selection of the Polish film Dekalog: Eight and make a basic conclusion of the final by argumentation and analysis as a case of the dialectical relation between the free will and responsibility.

• Korean Journal of Forensic Psychology
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.191-210
• /
• 2020

Developed by Paulhus and Carey(2011), the Free will and Determinism Plus Scale (FAD-Plus) is a widely-used tool for measuring the individuals' lay beliefs in free will and three closely related constructs: scientific determinism, fatalistic determinism, and unpredictability. Since no attempt has been made to validate Korean version of FAD-Plus, it is necessary to assess the psychometric properties as well as reliability analysis of Korean version of FAD-Plus. Total 202 people were surveyed and the subjective well-being and personality traits were measured to see how free will and related constructs relate to other psychological constructs. The study found that six of the total 27 items were deleted, which proved to be a reliable and validate questionnaire. The theoretical implications of the results and future directions for research are discussed.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.137
• /
• pp.81-108
• /
• 2016

In Medieval and Christian history, disputation between Augustine and Pelagius originated from different perspectives regarding the free-will of humans and the grace of God. This debate has continued throughout the Middle-Ages and the Reformation to date. In this regard, the purpose of this article is to investigate the implication of opposition and disputation between Augustine and Pelagius on today's society. Overemphasis on human capacity and free-will leads to humanism, while the arguments supporting the grace of God can encourage evasion of the ethical obligations of humans. Augustine and Pelagius had opposing views on this subject. Pelagius emerged in the Roman Empire, emphasizing the ethical responsibility of humans with free-will. On the other hand, Augustine argued that human nature and free-will had been damaged. With a pessimistic outlook on human capacity, he emphasized the grace of God. Shocked by the self-indulgence and ethical negligence of the Church of Rome which was the center of Christian nations at that time, Pelagius strongly urged Christians of the Roman Church to take moral responsibility. However, the theology of Augustine justified the status quo of the Roman Church while Pelagius focused on the necessity of an ethical life of humans based on free-will. Viewing Pelagius' strict moralism as a humanist view that emphasizes human capacity and action, Augustine showed strong opposition to such a view and instead emphasized God's grace. Pelagius was condemned as a heretic as his belief in free-will did not follow Augustine's Doctrine of Grace. However, Pelagianism penetrated Christian history and still poses a threat to Christianity to date. Societal corruption and depravity is still prevalent in today's society as it was in the time of Pelagius. South Korea for instance is exposed to serious moral corruption and a lack of social responsibility as shown in the sinking of the MV Sewol in April 2014. For those reasons, Christian society emphasizes Christian ethics and requires an honest leader who will set an example of Christian life. In this light, I want to examine the implications of disputation between Augustine and Pelagius on today's society.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• no.114
• /
• pp.177-212
• /
• 2016

Kants Begriff der Freiheit des Willens ist sehr kompliziert und verwirrend. Denn sowie es Ziel der ${\gg}$Kritik der praktischen Vernunft${\ll}$ ist, die reine praktische Vernunft zu beweisen, liegt der Fokus von Kants Begriff der Freiheit auf der Freiheit von Zwang, wobei Kant eine unbestimmte Haltung zur Freiheit von Notwendigkeit einnimmt und sie dann $schie{\ss}lich$ leugnet. Leibnizens Begriff der Freiheit dagegen hebt die Freiheit von Notwendigkeit hervor, denn er sagt, dass der menschliche Wille nicht nur vom Zwang der Leidenschaft, sondern auch von Notwendigkeit frei sei. Die Struktur von Leibnizens Freiheitslehre unterscheidet sich zwar sehr von der Kants, aber die Charakterlehren beider Denker, in denen die $M{\ddot{o}}glichkeit$ der Vereinbarkeit von Freiheit und Notwendigkeit behandelt werden, weisen viele Parallelen auf. Zudem ist Leibnizens Begriff der Freiheit sehr eindeutig. Daher ist ein Vergleich von Leibnizens und Kants Begriff der Freiheit nicht nur sinnvoll und $f{\ddot{u}}hrt$ zu einem besserem $Verst{\ddot{a}}ndnis$ von Kants Freiheitsbegriff, durch die vergleichende Analyse stellt sich zudem auch heraus, dass auch bei Kant nicht nur Freiheit von Zwang, sondern auch Freiheit von Notwendigkeit $m{\ddot{o}}glich$ ist. Leibniz geht $f{\ddot{u}}r$ seine Freiheitslehre von dem Begriff der Freiheit vom Zwang der Leidenschaft, welcher von allen Rationalisten anerkannt wird, sowie von dem Begriff der Freiheit von der Notwendigkeit, welcher von Spinoza negiert wird, aus. Kant dagegen definiert Freiheit als $Unabh{\ddot{a}}ngigkeit$ von den Naturgesetzen, was diesen Begriff von Anfang an unklar macht. Kant war sich anfangs der Zweideutigkeit dieses Konzepts nicht $bewu{\ss}t$ und hat es undeutlich gebraucht, doch in der Neuauflage von ${\gg}$Die Religion innerhalb der $blo{\ss}en$ Vernunft${\ll}$ erkennt er den Unterschied in den zwei Begriffen der Willensfreiheit, weshalb er bei der Rechtslehre in der ${\gg}$Metaphysik der Sitten${\ll}$ dazu kommt, die Wahlfreiheit zu negieren. Aber in den Abschnitten, wo Kant in der ${\gg}$Kritik der reinen Vernunft${\ll}$ und der ${\gg}$Kritik der praktischen Vernunft${\ll}$ die Vereinbarkeit von Freiheit und Notwendigkeit behandelt, $f{\ddot{u}}hrt$ Kant aus, so wie auch Leibniz, dass der intelligible Charakter des Menschen sich durch wiederholte freie Wahl formt, womit sich $best{\ddot{a}}tigt$, dass auch Kant die Freiheit der Wahl anerkannt hat. Kant leugnet die Wahlfreiheit, weil er der Ansicht ist, dass der Begriff der Freiheit als ein einheitlicher Begriff definiert werden muss. Doch Freiheit muss nicht zwingend einheitlich definiert werden. Da Freiheit von Zwang und Freiheit von Notwendigkeit nicht $widerspr{\ddot{u}}chliche$ Begriffe sind, $k{\ddot{o}}nnen$ sie dem selben Willen gleichzeitig zugeteilt werden. Auch wird erst hierdurch Autonomie $m{\ddot{o}}glich$ gemacht.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.359-387
• /
• 2015

As is well known, the consequence argument(shortly, CA) is intended as showing the incompatibility of free will and determinism. Recently, professor Choi Hoon tries to show there is a way in which Davidson's anomalous monism(shortly, AM) can be interpreted to counter CA. But I do not agree with his interpretation. So, in this paper, I will try to show why in the following way. In order to counter CA, it must be possible for AM to deny at least one of the premises of CA or to deny ${\beta}$ rule which guarantees the validity of CA or to show that free will is compatible with determinism in spite of the soundness of CA. In this paper, I will show that AM can do neither.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.116
• /
• pp.181-206
• /
• 2010

It is widely recognized that human beings have moral responsibility for their actions because they have free will to choose and control their acts. Unlike natural phenomena, however, human acts cannot be interpreted with simple, visible ones. Human acts are quite different from natural phenomena because they come about through a number of complicated, invisible phases taking place in our mind. In addition, human actions are under the influence of internal and external factors. Those various internal and external factors are divided into four sectors as follows; (1) the factors that can fall under control of our free will, (2) the factors in the interim phase that could come under our control, (3) the factors that are partially determined that we cannot choose or control over, and (4) the factors that completely determined, and can't be chosen or controlled. we have to pay attention to the fact that we can choose or control the internal and external factors that influence human action. However, there are still factors that are impossible to choose or control with our will. So it is highly unreasonable to hold accountable for actors by means of the factors that can't be chosen or controlled. Hence, the society should be also accountable for the acts of actors influenced by heredity and environment. For this, Politics should affect the external, undesirable, and uncontrollable factors beyond actors power. Education has to exert its influence over the internal and genetic factors by instilling sound values in human mind, too. It is because happy and desirable future will be possible by giving equal opportunities to us including the youth.