In an essay taken from

Valdosta
State
University by an unsighted author titled “Soft Determinism,” the author speaks about soft determinist John Stewart Mill and his theories on determinism. John Stewart Mill lived from 1806 until 1873. Mill believed that all events were determined, but that people are free and morally responsible for there actions in certain ways. Mill offers up the idea that we as humans have the ability to make choices and that we should be held responsible for those choices. However, Mill also states that we cannot act against something called the “strongest preference of motive.” Whatever this strongest preference or motive may be, we are in its control. He believes that punishment and reward are two examples of strong preferences or motives. If we fear punishment, we will not do something wrong. If we want to be rewarded for something, we will do something that we subconsciously know will get us a reward. 

Mill also claims that our character and personality can be changed by will.  “For Mill, every choice we make is determined, but choices meeting certain conditions are free.” This may mean that we may show different personalities and character traits based upon which preference or motive is driving us at a specific time.

 

Because this essay interests me, I am not going to spend a great deal of time summarizing it. This essay is very interesting to me because it talks about punishment. According to Mr. Mill, we do things to avoid punishment and seek reward. Although I do believe this to be mostly true, it still does not explain why people commit crime. If people truly feared punishment and did things specifically to avoid being punished, they would not commit criminal offenses. Although people generally commit crimes to benefit themselves; IE: to support drug habits or make money, there is no true reward to crime. 

If a person wanted to argue that a person committed a crime for the “reward,” then the following question has to be asked. If committing a crime truly does reward the criminal, then according to Mr. Mill’s theory, does the motive to gain reward outweigh the motive to avoid punishment?  

I agree that most everything we do is done with a preference in mind. However, I also believe that that preference is to not go to jail in most cases. I believe that there are a lot more factors in the reasons why we choose to do something or not to do something. I think that John Stewart Mill had a great theory but I don’t think that he looked in to it very deeply. Either that, or the author who wrote the paper that I am sighting did a poor job of displaying Mr. Mill’s work.  

I am apt to believe that if Mr. Mill’s theory was correct there would be no crime. If everyone acted to avoid punishment and gain reward, everyone would be an upstanding citizen trying to please everyone so that they would gain some sort of moral or physical reward. They would not be out in the street shooting people just for the sake of shooting them. I don’t mean to sound cold on a sensitive subject here, but I don’t see any reward in a student going on a mass shooting spree at a local university. You see, we have the free will to make choices. Most often we do not think about how something we do will benefit us. Criminals who commit crimes don’t think about going to jail. Students who massacre their fellow students don’t think about the consequences of their actions. We don’t live in a society where all choice is made based on a reward/punishment basis. Sorry folks, its just not that easy. 

Unknown. “Soft Determinism.” .

Valdosta
State
University. 17 Apr. 2007 <http://chiron.valdosta.edu/jrpeace/2010%20class%20notes%20Mill%20soft%20determinism.htm>.