It is commonly perceived that addiction and mental illness involves impairment of free will, which has been depicted as a controversial topic among philosophers. Free will can be a dangerous idea in regards to the notion that free will could compel one to feel at fault for their mental illness or addiction. Free will can be depicted as an illusion as it can’t be scientifically studied and depends on an individual’s physical and mental capacities. Mental illnesses and addiction imply that the concept of free will is compromised.
Free will is complex as most people put full faith in the power that we have to exert over free will. Free will is an expression in philosophy related to a specific type of capacity to choose a course of action among a multitude of preferences. It is formally referred to as the supposed will we as human beings possess to execute specific choices that are not outwardly determined. Free will can be explained by philosophers as essential in the practice of free actions and is considered to be required for moral responsibility. From its root, the issue of free will goes hand in hand to the scope of moral responsibility. Philosophers have studied this idea since ancient times, attempting to demonstrate that humans have ultimate control over our decisions. They emphasized that our actions fundamentally depend on us and are not fixed by fate. There are two perspectives of the overall argument of free will.
One aspect is that philosophers such as Descartes, who associates the concept of free will with freedom and independence of choice. In particular, he has labeled free will as “so free in its nature that it cannot be constrained.” This assumption can be depicted in terms of libertarianism which asserts indeterminism, which emphasizes the critical role of mind-body dualism as a requirement for free will. Libertarian free will is the viewpoint that we are free to choose our thought processes and actions at any given moment. On the other hand, in most spheres of philosophy, it is regularly assumed that we as humans employ a form of determinism, and that previous events determine our actions. Compatibilism relates as a concept that suggests a solution to the encompassing free will dilemma as it shows the conflict within free will and determinism. Compatibilism is the overall idea that free will is associated with determinism. It emphasizes that your freedom functions in the way responses move out of your “cognitive process” (Blackburn, Simon 96).
Concerning the perception of addiction and mental illness, free will has been debated vigorously. There are different opinions over whether one is choosing to go down the path of addiction and if an individual has oversight of their mental illness. This also brings up the matter over whether their brain chemistry has taken over any free will that a person held dear to them. Most of the conversation around free will grapples over whether human beings honestly maintain free will in our day-to-day lives or if it’s an illusion. Free will is a philosophical and religious concept that has found no backing in scientific evidence, despite the firm belief that we are free to choose whatever path we follow in life. It is crucial to recognize that when one analyzes a decision that they have made whether it be in the past or present, it can be linked genetic or societal circumstances that they have been exposed to. Mental illness and addiction are more scientifically oriented than free will which makes the overlapping of these conceptions intriguing.
Mental Illnesses are officially defined as health conditions involving changes in the possible combination of thinking, emotion, or behavior and at times can promote tribulations and difficulty in functioning. There are many different mental illnesses such as depression, schizophrenia, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and bipolar disorder. Each illness bears the possibility of changing a person’s life and can shape their decision-making behaviors in distinct ways which leaves a lasting impact on their freedom and free will.
Scientists who analyze mental illness interpret it as an imbalance in brain chemicals. Mental health professionals typically have to decipher an individual’s diagnosis based on the symptoms that a person has rather than being able to determine through blood tests. Due to not being able to easily diagnose through blood work, it makes it more difficult to interpret whether a person possesses a form of mental illness. The aim to treat a patient is to relieve the symptoms that are interfering with the person’s life. This treatment may enable them to function in an effective manner that fits better with their lives. Distress can arise in those with mental illness along with issues of operating in social, work or family environments. All of the complications that have the possibility of arising with mental illness makes the idea of free will convoluted.
Mental illnesses are frequently discussed and debated in philosophical matters of free will. Mental illnesses and the varied symptoms have been analyzed thoroughly and have affected the over-arching discussion over free will. We are all byproducts of brain chemistry and circumstance as no one can to pick and choose their genetic makeup or the way in which other people behave towards them. In a person who doesn’t deal with mental illness, the decisions they make are so automatic and done by habit compared to those who are the latter. When concentrating on particular mental disorders, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder emerges as being a significant block to free will.
Dr. Daniel Levy explains the associations between free will and advancements in the science of the brain and primarily focuses on obsessive-compulsive disorder. Levy concluded that “We understand that a person suffering from OCD, spending all day washing his hands and checking dozens of times that he remembered to lock the front door, cannot be thought of as having free will” (Meynen Gerben). This notion is essentially stating that obsessive compulsive disorder principally suppresses free will, while it doesn’t take it away altogether as choices can still be made it continues to reduce it. It doesn’t allow room for well-adjusted behavior such as deliberate foresight and lacks a sense of restraint due to overwhelming compulsions. Due to these intense obsessions, one loses a degree of control as these strong desires towards a certain activity aren’t avoidable. Gerben Meynen disagrees with the outlook that obsessions and compulsions are signals of heightened oversight, he identifies with the interpretation that OCD is a condition of diminished free will and therefore freedom.
Meynen stresses that “the concept of control is central in the philosophy of free will, and control is considered to be required for free will” (Meynen, Gerber). There are contrasting views that disorders such as OCD are linked to extra or excessive control. However, thought processes derived from philosophy demonstrate that OCD should not be treated as individuals having an excess range of authority over their actions, instead, a loss of control. This approach is compelling because mental illnesses have the ability sabotage and undercut control within. These difficulties arise by forcibly performing a deed in a precise manner because one may feel that they have no other choice separate from their impulses. Obsessive Compulsive disorder provokes ones free will to remain stagnant and life can reach a stand-still.
A person who lacks any form of mental illness goes on with their daily activities with ease making one choice and then smoothly proceeding to the next. In the mind of a person coping with OCD, it constructs a state of redundancy, generating an individual to make a choice repeatedly until they feel right about it Related to another mental illness, Schizophrenia the loss of free will can be utterly devastating. There are many symptoms such as vivid hallucinations that can take the form of voices allowing free will to be significantly reduced. In some extreme cases, the mental capacity associated with free will can ultimately cease to exist or become wholly altered. Lack of will and freedom materialized as an individual dealing with extreme schizophrenia formerly had some sense of control but then as symptoms intensify it is possible that they can’t make sound choices and decisions. In an individual afflicted with depression, every single decision is outwardly conscious and requires a mass amount of energy, even such routine tasks such as brushing one’s teeth or taking a shower can take everything in them.
In a person dealing with manic tendencies, like bipolar disorder, this free will is accelerated as choices are made with ease because they can often be overlooked and the consequences of an action are not considered. In a manic state, one may believe they are all-powerful and in control of their free will without regarding the benefits and downfalls of the choices they make. Their biochemical processes are the dominating force instead of their sound mental capabilities guiding them on the course of what they believe is their free will is in full force. It does not fit in with the compatibilist approach to free will as that states we must take responsibility for our actions even when there not something we can fully oversee.
It is essential to recognize the individual reality of free will that is present in each person. Mental illnesses are clear examples of the reduction in actively employing free will. Mental illnesses can manipulate a person can impair free will as a whole. All mental disorders that vary from insanity to less extreme forms have a large-scale effect on free will. The troubling part of free will is the sentiment of choice being a factor in mental illness. Chemical imbalances can reshape one’s reasoning, decision making, and moral responsibility which are critical aspects of free will. Philosophers of free will typically hold that mental disorders compromise free will and reduce the understanding of moral responsibility.
In the hard determinism outlook of free will they conclude that since we have no apparent free will then mental illness doesn’t have to do with anything we choose to do. Mental illness puts free will in jeopardy, and can be identified as the ultimate seizing of will. It is evident that free will is not a given and is not fluid. It is instead a process that in those with mental illness has resulted in relentless modifications. In instances where someone acts in spite of their underlying beliefs as shown in cases of compulsive disorders cannot be depicted as exerting free will. While it is known that people with mental illnesses aren’t in a state of total loss of decision-making in their lives, free will is in a sense reduced.
There is an immense amount of stigma and shame placed on addiction as some depict it as merely a form of weakness. The further understanding that addiction is a result of bio-chemical factors this could help reduce stigma. Addiction comes down to brain chemistry and its reward systems that guide the course of addiction. Any endeavor that increases pleasure generates assorted circuits in our brain. The primary function of this reward system is to exhibit which situations allowed this pleasure to occur, so we can repeat the behavior and endure the euphoria associated with it. Addiction hijacks the brain, and as a consequence, the addict’s behavior is fully transformed into solely seeking drug use and the next time they can get high. With rapid use, the reward system of the brain becomes fixated on the need for the drug.
Addiction results in the impairment to merely quit using drugs or alcohol which adds to the concept that addicts have a hard time being the authority figure in their individual ability to exercise free will. When the brain is deprived of drugs which it has come to be accustomed to it reacts in the form of extreme stress. The impairment of regulation over addiction is presented as the result of a dysfunction in the certain parts of the brain which creates a reduced resistence of drug reactions. It is common knowledge that addicts have decreased activity in several crucial functions of brain activity which can essentially create a shortage in proper decision making. Genetic determinants handed down from a family member may boost the odds of being susceptible to an addiction. The primary explanation for addiction is that the brain is adapting to its environment which is not an easy choice. This scientific evidence demonstrates how addiction affects the brain in ways that free will can’t even be considered a significant factor in decision making and power over one’s life.
Free will has been the object of debate in the context of addiction given that addiction could compromise an individual’s ability to choose freely between alternative courses of action. It presents the assumption of whether any of us have free will when it comes to addictive substances, or are they the ultimate decision makers. In philosophy, free will has been scrutinized as it is seen as an all or nothing decision that one has complete control over. Frankfurt “describes an addict as a person who is not free” (Meynen, Gerber). He stresses that carrying out one’s own free will implies that one has a choice over the action and also wants to maintain the will to act.
For example, an addict who has the will to use heroin but who lacks the desire to have this will is not free when using the drug. It is important to grasp that addiction is not only a disease, but it has the power to enable us to exercise free will making it no longer perform as it should. When an individual is experiencing drug addiction a large portion of their brain is no longer able to produce the free will that aids in our biological functioning as a whole. Being free of addiction is a matter that many people take for granted, as an addict loses the ability to have a voluntary decision for or against taking the drug in a “normal” fashion. There is a downside to the belief of addiction resulting in a loss of free will relating to addicts who strongly believe they lack the free will they need to quit an addiction and might believe it’s not worth trying at all.
During the time, a person is at risk of losing control of their free will to the power of addiction it demonstrates how easily one can become defenseless over their choices. This is the time where exercising that free will becomes crucial before an addictive substance creates momentum turning them into a person whose only intent is to reach that next high. Depicting addiction as a form of free will has become increasingly unrealistic due to the rise and credibility in scientific evidence. Addiction is basically a disorder of the will as it wipes out all rational decision-making processes. Dr. Richard Rosenthal asserts that “as a result of the loss of control in the addicted state, people can make exceedingly bad and completely unreasonable decisions” (Wright, Chris). Addiction can be depicted as a disease that undermines the fully functioning brain. Under the extreme temptation that drug addiction produces the power of will itself is weakened.
Addictive desires are quite insatiable, and satisfying these intense cravings are a critical component and the primary objective of an addict’s life. It encompasses them as a whole and makes the idea of fate a cruel joke. In the depths of addiction, some might disregard specific things that would usually matter to them such as loved ones and friends. While addiction can be employed in various ways, the fundamental concept it the implication of the loss of the ability to choose which is the loss of free will. Free will emphasizes the idea that we are responsible for our choices and the consequences that come along with them. Our democratic system implies that people freely live their lives and therefore must take responsibility for their actions.
The idea of losing choice is almost unimaginable to most especially with the freedom we are granted in the United States. Our free society becomes a complex and problematic element within the context of addiction when analyzed in a scientific framework. Addiction appears to involve a complete loss of reason and a lack of will. Addiction is a constant uphill battle that becomes even more complicated with the notion of free will and the power to make healthy choices. While it is very possible to break free of addiction, although in a drug-induced state, free will becomes debilitated. Their cravings overpower will in every sense and they become enslaved to the substance. The stressors that arise from addiction can obscure thinking and induce people to seek that positive reinforcement. People often embark on this detrimental life choice without grasping the potential consequences. Our society is known to blame addicts for their condition. We utilize the concept of free will as almost an excuse or a scapegoat in order to push our own set of beliefs on to others.
Although taking a substance starts with a choice, that individual did not choose to be addicted and it no longer becomes a choice short after. What has prevented people from enduring a drug-addled lifestyle is that their brains did not respond in the same way an addict does. They were not genetically predisposed with addiction making it harder for them to see how easy it can be to fall into addiction. In modern times the excessive use of alcohol or drugs has been depicted as controllable behavior. Those who abused these substances were perceived as exercising their free will and choosing not to limit or control this behavior. Society tends to punish addicted individuals rather than understand what led them to addiction and provide a plan of action for rehabilitation.
It is clear that severe mental illness and continued addictive behavior is debilitating to many aspects of a person’s life. Mental illnesses and addiction implies that the concept of free will is compromised. Free will is not the primary source of our actions as there are numerous other variables that come into the picture. I have come to realize the nature of free will is in part an illusion because there are various aspects that can adjust its effect as a whole. For many philosophers, to believe in free will is to assume that human beings can be the core decision makers for their actions and outside influences or another approach that fate determines human action. Free will can’t determine every circumstance and isn’t the all-encompassing answer.
Works Cited
- Meyner, Gerben. ‘Free Will and Mental Disorder: Exploring the Relationship.’ US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health, US National Library of Medicine, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2975916/. Accessed 8 Oct. 2012.
- O’Connor, Peg. ‘In the Cave: Philosophy and Addiction.’ The New York Times, The New York Times Company, 8 Jan. 2012, opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/08/out-of-the-cave-philosophy-and-addiction/?module=ArrowsNav&contentCollection=Opinion&action=keypress®ion=FixedLeft&pgtype=Blogs.
- Wright, Chris. ‘Do Addicts Have Free Will?’ AlterNet, AlterNet Media, 30 Nov. 2012, www.alternet.org/do-addicts-have-free-will.
