Now this word has a perfectly well-defined
signification in every-day life. We say that anything is free when
it is not subject to external constraint. We also know exactly
what we mean when we say that a man is free to do a certain act.
We mean that if he chooses to do it there is no external
constraint acting to prevent him. In all cases a relation of two
things is implied in the word, some active agent or power, and the
presence or absence of another constraining agent. Now, when we
inquire whether the will itself is free, irrespective of external
constraints, the word free no longer has a meaning, because one of
the elements implied in it is ignored.
To inquire whether the will itself is free is like inquiring
whether fire itself is consumed by the burning, or whether
clothing is itself clad. It is not, therefore, at all surprising
that both parties have been able to dispute without end, but it is
a most astonishing phenomenon of the human intellect that the
dispute should go on generation after generation without the
parties finding out whether there was really any difference of
opinion between them on the subject. I venture to say that if
there is any such difference, neither party has ever analyzed the
meaning of the words used sufficiently far to show it.
Pages:
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426