Hide Assignment InformationTurnitinThis assignment will be submitted to Turnitin.InstructionsUsing one of the two prompts below, write an essay (approximately 1000 words).  Read the grading rubric BEFORE writing so that you are sure to address all four elements of the grading rubric.  Do not type the essay directly into Brightspace.  YOU MUST SAVE YOUR ESSAY AND ATTACH IT TO THE LINK ABOVE (Where it reads, "Essay: Due at or before 11:00PM Central Time, May 13, 2025" and is underlined above.) If you do not know what this means or how to save your work, email me immediately.  Not knowing how will not be an excuse to allow late work.  The essay will go through software that will test for plagiarism.  Be sure that when you write your essay you do not use material from other sources without citing them.  Doing so is cheating and grounds for a 0.
You can write your essay as if you are writing to a friend who missed class on the day this was discussed.  I am evaluating your ability to explain these arguments and concepts to someone who is not familiar with them.  There is no bibliography or works cited page required. You may write in first person or even write the essay as if it were a letter to your "friend" from class.
Note: It is very important that you receive a confirmation email.  This confirms that you submitted the essay before the deadline. If the file is corrupted or empty, I will not allow another attempt unless you can show me the confirmation email.
Here are the two choices for your essay topic:
- Are Sartre and Smullyan right that it is impossible for anything that is self-conscious not to have free will?  Explain and evaluate your position.
- Is it rational to believe something when you do not have sufficient evidence?  Explain and evaluate your position.
Using one of the two prompts below, write an essay (approximately 1000 words). Read the grading rubric BEFORE writing so that you are sure to address all four elements of the grading rubric. Do not type the essay directly into Brightspace. YOU MUST SAVE YOUR ESSAY AND ATTACH IT TO THE LINK ABOVE (Where it reads, "Essay: Due at or before 11:00PM Central Time, May 13, 2025" and is underlined above.) If you do not know what this means or how to save your work, email me immediately. Not knowing how will not be an excuse to allow late work. The essay will go through software that will test for plagiarism. Be sure that when you write your essay you do not use material from other sources without citing them. Doing so is cheating and grounds for a 0.
You can write your essay as if you are writing to a friend who missed class on the day this was discussed. I am evaluating your ability to explain these arguments and concepts to someone who is not familiar with them. There is no bibliography or works cited page required. You may write in first person or even write the essay as if it were a letter to your "friend" from class.
Note: It is very important that you receive a confirmation email. This confirms that you submitted the essay before the deadline. If the file is corrupted or empty, I will not allow another attempt unless you can show me the confirmation email.
Here are the two choices for your essay topic:
- Are Sartre and Smullyan right that it is impossible for anything that is self-conscious not to have free will? Explain and evaluate your position.
- Is it rational to believe something when you do not have sufficient evidence? Explain and evaluate your position.
Solution
Hey [Friend’s Name],
You missed a wild philosophy class this week! We talked about this big question: “Are Sartre and Smullyan right that it’s impossible for anything self-conscious not to have free will?” I’ll break down what they mean, what arguments came up, and what I honestly think about it. This is kind of like a letter, so feel free to ask if anything is confusing!
What’s the Big Deal About Self-Consciousness and Free Will?
Let’s start simple: self-consciousness just means being aware of yourself as a thinking being—you know you exist, you can reflect on your own thoughts, make choices, feel regret, and so on.
Free will, on the other hand, is the idea that you genuinely get to choose your actions, that you aren’t just a robot programmed to react in certain ways. It’s about being responsible for what you do.
So Sartre and Smullyan both argue that if something is truly self-conscious, it must have free will. In other words, if you can think “I am me,” and reflect on your choices, then it’s impossible for you not to have some kind of freedom in making decisions.
Sartre’s Take
Jean-Paul Sartre, a famous existentialist philosopher, really pushed this idea. He said “existence precedes essence,” which basically means that humans exist first, and then create themselves by the choices they make. According to Sartre, we are “condemned to be free”—he actually thought freedom is kind of a burden. Even if you try to do nothing, you are choosing to do nothing. There’s no escape from responsibility.
For Sartre, the ability to step back, think about your choices, and imagine doing otherwise is exactly what creates free will. The more you are aware of yourself, the more you realize you could act differently—so self-consciousness and free will are tangled up together.
Smullyan’s Twist
Raymond Smullyan, a philosopher and logician, took a slightly different but related angle. He asked us to imagine creatures with self-consciousness but no free will. He argued this is almost a contradiction: if you’re self-conscious, you recognize your ability to choose, and the concept of “should” or “ought” makes sense. If you were totally determined—like a rock rolling down a hill—why would you even think about what you should do? Smullyan says, the very act of reflecting on your own choices proves that you’re free to make them.
Arguments Against Sartre and Smullyan
Of course, not everyone agrees. Some philosophers (like the determinists) think you can be self-conscious and lack free will. For example, imagine a super-advanced robot that knows all about itself, can reflect on its decisions, but every single action it takes is the result of pre-set programming or physical laws. Is it really free? Maybe not.
There’s also the neuroscience angle: some scientists think our brains make decisions before we’re aware of them. If that’s true, maybe self-consciousness is just “watching” choices our brains already made. In that view, free will could be an illusion, even for self-conscious beings.
There’s also the idea that animals like dolphins or chimps might be self-conscious (they recognize themselves in mirrors), but it’s not clear if they have free will in the human sense. Maybe self-consciousness comes in degrees, and so does free will.
My Take: Is Self-Consciousness Enough?
Personally, I think Sartre and Smullyan make a strong point, but I’m not sure it’s the whole story.
Why I Find Their Argument Convincing:
If you’re self-conscious, you can think about alternatives. For example, you can say “I could have chosen differently.” That sense of “could have done otherwise” seems pretty important for free will. Also, feeling regret, pride, or responsibility only makes sense if you believe you have some choice. Otherwise, why beat yourself up over things you literally couldn’t control?
But…Here’s Where I’m Unsure:
What if self-consciousness is just another complex process that looks like free will, but is actually determined by brain chemistry, upbringing, or even randomness? Like, just because I’m aware of making a choice, does that mean the choice was really free? Or did my brain “decide” for me, and I just felt like I was in charge? Some scientists say most of our decisions happen subconsciously.
Also, if you imagine a self-conscious AI that can describe itself, consider alternatives, but is still ultimately following its programming, is that really free will? Maybe self-consciousness is necessary for free will, but not enough by itself.
Analogy: The Self-Driving Car
Imagine a self-driving car that is super advanced. It has cameras everywhere and knows exactly what it’s doing. Maybe it can even “think” about its route. But at the end of the day, it’s still following programming. Is that car free? I’d say no—it’s self-monitoring, but it can’t really choose in the way humans do.
But what about us? Are we just fancier self-driving cars, or does our ability to ask, “Should I turn left or right?” give us real freedom? I think that’s what makes humans unique, but I have to admit, it’s hard to prove.
Final Thoughts
So, do I think Sartre and Smullyan are completely right? I think they are right that self-consciousness is super important for free will—if you can’t reflect on your choices, you can’t be truly free. But I’m not convinced that just being self-conscious automatically means you have free will. It’s possible to imagine a self-aware being that is still determined by other forces.
In short:
-
Self-consciousness seems necessary for free will.
-
But it might not be enough by itself; other factors matter too.
-
Free will probably requires both self-awareness and some real ability to make choices that aren’t totally determined by outside forces.
Let me know what you think, or if this clears things up! If you want to chat more about robots, brains, or freedom, hit me up.
— [Your Name]