Nolan 1

Emily Nolan
Professor Jeremy Ball
Philosophy 100
19 March 2014
Freewill vs. Determinism According to Holbach
Free will is the idea that the choices we make are completely under our own control with
nothing foreseeing the consequences that lie ahead. Therefore, a choice we make that is not
under our own control must somehow be determined by something else. Generally, free will
establishes the level of responsibility one claims for their actions. It can then be said that if our
choices are made with complete freedom then certainly we must claim responsibility for our
choices and actions that follow. On the other hand, if outside forces control our choices, we
cannot be held responsible for our actions. The predetermining of every aspect of our lives by a
higher being, an alternate force, or an outside force is what is known as determinism. Proving
that free will does not exist by supporting his theory of determinism is the main point that French
philosopher Paul Holbach approaches in writing his essay, "The Illusion of Free Will."
According to Holbach, the something else that controls us is an external or internal
force, which actually has the ability to drive humans to make certain choices and actions. In his
dissertation he states that man is never a free agent. By this he means that we are never truly free
because we are never in control to make our own decisions. He then argues that though it may be
hard to accept that we are not in control, it must be so because, according to his belief in
determinism, it is the absolute truth. No human has the choice of whether or not we wanted to be
born into the world of existence, and from that moment onward we do not have the freedom to
choose anything in our lives. As adults we are expected by society to think and make decisions
Nolan 2
for ourselves; essentially to be independent. However with Holbachs belief in determinism, this
idea of making our own choices is incorrect. This is because every thought that comes to our
minds and every single decision we make are influenced by something or someone else. Holbach
seems to explain free will as the primary cause of our actions or final decisions. Generally
speaking, Holbach has disproved the theory that free will exists by saying that our will to do,
think, or say something is a secondary cause of our actions. He does not go as far as to say that
every thought is predetermined for us, but he does believe the choices we make are not
completely up to us. By this he means there is a force, perhaps a higher being, which is not a
part of us that urges us to make our decisions. In essence, he is proving that an agents actions
are necessary in order for humans to function. It is through this arguing that Holbach devises his
first premise.
After describing what free will is, Holbach continues on to describe what it is that rules
over us in his belief of determinism. Rather than a higher being controlling us in a matrix-like
way that we are unconscious of, Holbach believes that our decision-making is based on what has
formed us. By this he means everything that has ever touched our lives whether or not we
consciously realize the impact it has left on us. This ranges from religious influences, education,
family values, anything witnessed, heard, or anything and anyone that we may have passion
towards. The external social factors that mold us determine who we are as individual beings. If
we were born in a completely different society then we would be distinct because the forces that
shape us would be different, and is therefore not a matter of free choice. This idea is similar to
the idea of nature versus nurture being that both our genetics from birth as well as the outside
influences of society shape who we are and who we will become. Holbach further believed that
human beings are completely physical. With this claim it can then be said that if humans are
Nolan 3
simply a collection of molecules, then we are a part of nature. If we are then a part of nature,
which is not free, then we too, as physical creatures, are not free.
One example that Holbach uses to explain free will is that of the extremely thirsty man
who has the option of drinking out of a poisoned water fountain. His first choice would be to
drink the water as he is so terribly parched; yet his fear of death overrides his need for water with
the ultimate decision being made to not drink the deadly water. However, another man may see
his need for the water to be more important than fulfilling a longer life and therefore will drink
the poisoned water. This example of what is human will demonstrates that what may have been a
primary choice, can turn into a secondary choice once new conditions are placed on a situation.
These conditions are what then make it clear that humans are not free agents as there can always
be something to interfere with the actions and decisions we make. While one man may see the
option to stay thirsty and eventually live to be more desirable, another man may see drinking the
poisoned water and ending his life more desirable than the thirst. Holbachs third premise of
determinism is that man naturally desires happiness, not just self-preservation, which is what is
demonstrated by the mans choice of either drinking the poison to quench thirst, or to stay
tortured by thirst with the hope to live.
Looking further into Holbachs idea that free will can be the cause of our final decisions
or of where we end up, for example with death. His first premise is that there are both external
causes, which are from outside of the being, and internal causes, which are from within the
being. With this idea it can be said that there is no difference between a man jumping out of an
airplane and someone pushing the man out of the airplane because either way an external or
internal force determines his final destination. The internal force being with the man who jumps
out of the plane by himself, and as for the man who was pushed out, the person who pushes him
Nolan 4
is the external force altogether. This example once again supports how Holbach shows that it is
not within an agents power to act other than he or she does. However, just because we do not
have the power to freely choose what happens to us or what we do, does not mean we are not
willing for certain things to happen. Holbach describes his reply to the reasoning of free will in
this premise when he wrote [] it is sufficient to consider that it in nowise depends upon
himself to place or remove the obstacles that either determine or resist him; the motive that
causes his action is no more in his own power than the obstacle that impedes him, whether this
obstacle or motive be within his own machine or exterior of his person [] (Holbach 441).
Every human acts necessarily according to what has already been determined for his or her
future. The sensations that our being receives from exterior objects are what form the ideas,
which are the general consequences of our predetermined lives. Overall, if humans had the
ability to perceive all of the complex causal relations of human behavior, Holbach argues that we
would be convinced that humans do not have free will.
If a person acts freely and their activity is not caused or influenced in any way, then said
person would be considered to have free will. However, all human actions must have a cause or
reason behind their motive, therefore, no human ever has the power to act freely. With this being
Holbachs main argument in his belief of determinism his premises further support that the
illusion of freedom is caused by our ignorance of the origins of our actions, in which such
ignorance is due to the intricacy of the causes of said actions.