“Critically assess the claim that we are morally determined” 35 marks
Being morally determined means that people have no control over how they act and are therefore not morally responsible for their actions. There are a number of reasons people claim that people are morally determined such as being determined by God, our genetics or by our upbringing. Furthermore, there are also different viewpoints of determinism: hard, soft and libertarianism. A hard determinist such as Spinoza would believe that we are thoroughly determined and have no choice or responsibility over our moral actions. A soft determinist would argue that humans are in part morally determined but do have the ability to control their moral actions; they get the final say. A libertarian would be strongly against hard determinism, arguing that humans are completely free to act as they choose and always have the decision on what they do. A libertarian and a hard determinist would both say that they are incompatible with one another, meaning that they cannot work together like a soft determinist would argue.
On the one hand, it could be argued that we are morally determined by our upbringing and our social conditioning. Scholars such as Darrow argued that we are certainly too some extent morally determined because we are all heavily influenced by our upbringing and our society. As people have no control over how they are brought up, it could be argued they are determined by what they have been experienced from people around them and what they have been taught during their childhood.
On the other hand, however, it could also be argued that whilst there may be some truth that people are influenced by their upbringing and social conditioning, they do still have some control over how much it influences them and the moral decisions they will make. For example, if a man’s parents are both criminals it does necessarily mean that the man will become a criminal himself. Whilst it may mean he is more...