Email this article 
Hide
Show all
Original Research - Special Collection: Echoes of eco-discourses
Two incompatible images of the material nature of human beings and of being human: Reframing the free will debate
Submitted: 10 November 2025 | Published: 13 August 2026
About the author(s)
Pieter F. Craffert, Department of Biblical and Ancient Studies, College of Human Sciences, University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa; and, Department of New Testament, Faculty of Theology and Religion, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South AfricaAbstract
Recent debates about free will, especially in the neurosciences, have been central to the debate about what it is to be human. Two recent publications, one by Robert Sapolsky and the other by Kevin Mitchell, not only represent distinct views on free will and moral accountability, but they depart from different images of human beings and divergent framings of the puzzle. For Sapolsky, there is no free will and moral accountability because human beings are just biological machines, subject to the deterministic laws of nature that control all physical objects. Based on an evolutionary argument, Mitchell develops an image of living organisms as complex systems that display agency.
Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implications: This free will debate not only results in distinct images of being human but also departs from divergent images of what a human being is.
Keywords
Metrics
Total abstract views: 355Total article views: 386
