What Makes Free Will Free: The Impossibility of Predicting Genuine Creativity

Published: Sep 19, 2020
free will free action creativity predictability compatibilism philosophical necessity substantial freedom John Stuart Mill Immanuel Kant
Nikos Erinakis
In this paper I argue that Mill’s ‘Doctrine of Philosophical Necessity’ regarding the human will and action cannot apply on all cases, and that the human mind has potentially the capacity to create freely a will or action that, no matter what kind of knowledge we possess, cannot be predicted. More precisely, I argue against Mill’s attempt of conjunction between the freedom of the will and the ‘Doctrine of Philosophical Necessity’ while I attempt a comparison with the relevant Kantian approach. I then claim that a will cannot be free and be predicted at the same time, as both the elements of freedom and unpredictability of the will are founded on the very process of its formulation as an outcome of genuine creativity. I, thus, attempt to propose a more substantially free view of free will and action than the ones presented by the prominent conceptions.
Article Details
  • Section
  • Articles
Download data is not yet available.
Author Biography
Nikos Erinakis, Hellenic Open University
Adjunct Lecturer
Aristotle. Metaphysics: Book V. Translated by Hugh Tredennick, and G. Cyril Armstrong. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1935.
Ayer, Alfred Jules. “Fatalism.” In The Concept of a Person and Other Essays. London: Macmillan, 1963.
Berger, Fred R. Happiness, Justice, and Freedom: The Moral and Political Philosophy of John Stuart Mill. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1984.
Boden, Margaret (ed.). Dimensions of Creativity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1994.
Boden, Margaret. The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms. London: Routledge, 2004.
Boolos, George. “On Second-Order Logic.” The Journal of Philosophy 72, no. 16 (1975): 509-527.
Canfield, John V. “The Compatibility of Free Will and Determinism.” The Philosophical Review 71, no. 3 (1962): 352-368.
Carlisle, Janice. John Stuart Mill and the Writing of Character. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1991.
Clarke, Randolph. “Toward a Credible Agent-Causal Account of Free Will.” Noûs 27, no. 2 (1993): 191-203.
Clark, Samuel. “Love, Poetry, and the Good Life: Mill’s Autobiography and Perfectionist Ethics.” Inquiry 53, no. 6 (2010): 565-578.
Chisolm, Roderick. “Human Freedom and the Self.” In The Lindley Lecture. University of Kansas, 1964.
Dennett, Daniel C. “The Self as a Center of Narrative Gravity.” In Self and Consciousness: Multiple Perspectives, edited by F. Kessel, P. Cole, and D. Johnson, 103-115. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1992.
Dennett, Daniel C., Maxwell Bennett, Peter Hacker, and John Searle. Neuroscience and Philosophy: Brain, Mind, and Language. New York: Columbia University Press, 2007.
Donner, Wendy. The Liberal Self. John Stuart Mill’s Moral and Political Philosophy. Ithaca & London: Cornell University Press, 1991.
Fain, Haskell. “Prediction and Constraint.” Mind 67, no. 267 (1958): 366-378.
Friedman, Marilyn A. “Autonomy and the Split-Level Self.” The Southern Journal of Philosophy 24, no. 1 (1986): 19-35.
Garrett, Clarke. “Joseph Priestley, the Millennium, and the French Revolution.” Journal of the History of Ideas 34, no. 1 (1973): 51-66.
Grant, James Eric. The Critical Imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
Goldman, Alvin I. “The Compatibility of Mechanism and Purpose.” The Philosophical Review 78, no. 4 (1969): 468-482.
Hancock, Rocer. “Ethics and History in Kant and Mill.” Ethics 68 (1957): 56-60.
Hare, Richard Mervyn. Freedom and Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1963.
Hasker, William. “The Transcendental Refutation of Determinism.” The Southern Journal of Philosophy 11, no. 3 (1973): 175-183.
Herbst, Peter. “Freedom and Prediction.” Mind 66, no. 261 (1957): 1-27.
Hood, Bruce. The Self Illusion: Why There Is no ‘You’ Inside Your Head. London: Constable, 2012.
Kant, Immanuel. Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. Edited and translated by Mary J. Gregor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Kramnick, Isaac. “Eighteenth-Century Science and Radical Social Theory: The Case of Joseph Priestley’s Scientific Liberalism.” Journal of British Studies 25, no. 1 (1986): 1-30.
Meyers, Diana T. (ed.). Feminists Rethink the Self. Boulder: Westview Press, 1997.
Mieth, Corinna, and Jacob Rosenthal. “‘Freedom must be Presupposed as a Property of the Will of All Rational Beings’ (GMS III, 2).” In Immanuel Kant, Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals, edited by Cristoph Horn, and Deiter Schoenecker, 247-284. Berlin & New York: de Gruyter, 2006.
Mill, John Stuart. The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. Edited by John M. Robson. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1963-1991.
Mill, John Stuart. A System of Logic: Ratiocinative and Inductive. In The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, edited by J. M. Robson. Toronto: Toronto University Press, 1974.
Millgram, Elijah. “John Stuart Mill, Determinism, and the Problem of Induction.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87, no. 2 (2009): 183-199.
Nagel, Thomas. Mortal Questions. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1979.
Nagel, Thomas. The View from Nowhere. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.
Narveson, Jan. Morality and Utility. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press, 1967.
Nussbaum, Martha C. “Mill between Aristotle & Bentham.” Daedalus 133, no. 2 (2004): 60-68.
O’Connor, Daniel J. “Determinism and Predictability.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 7, no. 28 (1957): 310-315.
O’Connor, Timothy. Persons and Causes: The Metaphysics of Free Will. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Ofstad, Harald. An Inquiry into the Freedom of Decision. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1961.
Priestley, Joseph. The Doctrine of Philosophical Necessity Illustrated; Being an Appendix to the Disquisitions Relating to Matter and Spirit. To Which is Added an Answer to the Letters on Materialism, and on Hartley’s Theory of the Mind. London: Printed for J. Johnson, 1777.
Rohatyn, Dennis A. “Mill, Kant, and Negative Utility.” Philosophia 5 (1975): 515-521.
Schofield, Robert E. The Enlightened Joseph Priestley: A Study of His Life and Work from 1773 to 1804. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004.
Schopenhauer, Arthur. On the Freedom of the Will. Trondheim: Royal Norwegian Society of Sciences, 1839.
Skorupski, John. Why Read Mill Today? London & New York: Routledge, 2006.
Smart, John Jamieson Carswell, and Bernard Williams. An Outline of a System of Utilitarian Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973.
Smart, Roderich Ninian. “Negative Utilitarianism.” Mind 67, no. 268 (1958): 542-543.
Spir, African. Denken und Wirklichkeit. Versuch einer Erneuerung der kritischen Philosophie. Leipzig: J. G. Findel, 1873.
Taylor, Richard. “Fatalism.” The Philosophical Review 71, no. 1 (1962): 56-66.
Taylor, Richard. Action and Purpose. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1966.
Urmson, James O. “The Interpretation of the Moral Philosophy of J. S. Mill.” The Philosophical Quarterly 3, no. 10 (1953): 33-39.
Wilde, Norman. “Kant’s Relation to Utilitarianism.” The Philosophical Review 3, no. 3 (1894): 289-304.
Williams, Bernard. Moral Luck. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981.
Williams, Bernard. “Postscript.” In Moral Luck, edited by D. Statman, 251-258. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993.
Wood, Allen. Kantian Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.