Free will and animal suicide
Animal Sentience January 1, 2022 DOI: 10.51291/2377-7478.1693 via OpenAlex
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractDavid Peña-Guzmán argues against the claim that only humans can commit suicide because only humans have free will, offering two reasons: nonhuman animals may possess free will, and the libertarian concept of free will conflicts with scientific explanation. While the objection to restricting suicide to humans is correct, his critique of libertarian free will is misdirected; the real issues are the assumptions that free choices require conscious self-reflection or that freedom cannot vary in degree.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Keywords | Free will Commit Criticism Free state Libertarianism |
| Citations | 1 |
| Key finding | Peña-Guzmán's criticism of libertarian free will is misplaced; the assumptions that free choices require self-reflection or that freedom is not a matter of degree are the actual problems. |
Abstract
David Peña-Guzmán presents two arguments against the view that because only humans have free will only humans can commit suicide: (1) nonhuman animals may possess free will, and (2) the libertarian notion of free will is incompatible with scientific explanation. The free will objection to animal suicide is indeed mistaken, but Peña-Guzmán’s criticism of the libertarian notion of free will seems misplaced. His target should instead be the assumption that free choices must be made consciously or self-reflectively or the assumption that freedom cannot come in degrees.