Explain the difference between Libetarianism and Hard Determinism. Discuss which is the stronger argument.

Libertarianism is the claim that human individuals have autonomous control over their actions, and are, therefore, morally accountable agents. Hard determinism, on the other hand, claims that an individual's actions are governed by the principles of nature, and are therefore subject to the law of cause and effect. Since a cause necessarily entails a particular effect, the hard determinist argues that individuals' actions are wholly determined by their preceeding causes. The hard determinist view, unlike the libertarian, claims that autonomous decision making and moral responsibility is fundamentally illusory.

Libertarianism has the advantage that it reflects our common sense view of the world. We ordinarily believe that, in any given situation, we could have chosen to act otherwise than how we in fact acted. Although the libertarian point of view is intuitively plausible, it entails metaphysical positions which are difficult to justify. For example, on what grounds does the libertarian deny that our decisions are subject to the determining power of cause and effect? The most plasuible reply to this question is given by Richard Swinburne, who argues that the laws which givern physical reality do not apply equally to the mind, since the mind is by nature immaterial. Swinburne's arguement, therefore, rejects the hard determinist position on the grounds that it incorrectly assumes that physical laws apply to the immaterial mind. Mind and matter, he claims, are ontologically distinct. It seems, however, that Swinburne's position becomes untenable as soon as we consdier contemporary scientific discoveries, which prove that subjective experience is a result of certain physical neurological states of the brain. Decisions and actions are caused by physical events in the brain, which are themsevles caused by previous events in the brain, and so on, ad infinitum. Since physical and mental events are fundamentally related, Swinburne's libertarian argument cannot be accepted. In conclusion, although hard determinists face the difficult question of why we generally consider ourselves to be moral agents even though we are not, they face significantly fewer metaphysical problems that the libertarian, who wants to argue for complete ethical responsibility.