Nature Versus Nurture: The Arguments of Ree, Campbell and Wolf


Add to cart
Essay #: 068055
Total text length is 7,162 characters (approximately 4.9 pages).

Excerpts from the Paper

The beginning:
Nature Versus Nurture: The Arguments of Ree, Campbell and Wolf
Philosophy has come a long way in deciphering the ways of the mind, especially the mind of the personal self. Philosophers have studied human nature and have tried hard to understand the impetus for human action. Now, the philosophical and social trends call for a different way to discuss this issue: a merging of the two concepts to create a decidedly integrated usage of free will, and how it functions in our lives. The biological or instilled actions within us are always in contention with the way that we act and think. Philosophers often try to explain the gap between those components. Ideally, a combination of both would be used to explain the world around us. Though Ree,...
The end:
.....n someone without that abusive past. One must be responsible for ourselves in order to be responsible for our actions, but we must know that both our own decisions and who we are biologically make us a whole.
In these ways, Wolf, Ree and Campbell are very skeptical of the idea of free will. All think humans possess the power of choice, but for different reasons. This is what makes these philosophers distinct from one another. Wolf does the best job of showing how free will and biology can work in conjunction with one another, and not just either free will or nature.
Bailey, Andrew. First Philosophy: God, Mind and Freedom. New York: Broadview Press, 2004.
Wolf, Susan. Freedom Within Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.