Chanelle Smith
Mrs. Fresco
Monday, November 24, 2014
This essay justifies the actions of Gunner Jay Lindberg by means of the Determinism view. I will support this argument through the views of Pierre Simon de la Place and Sigmund Freud. Viewpoints that criticize this argument consist of Libertarianism defended by Jean Paul Satre and Compatibalism defended by Immanuel Kant. By means of Determinist viewpoint this essay will show that Lindberg was not liberal to make the decisions he did and essentially should not be held fully responsible for the murder of Thin Minh Ly. Pierre Simon believes that, “there is nothing in the world that cannot be explained by the cause of something else”. If Lindberg did despise Asians, it would be solely due to what happened to him in 1998. Gunner Jay Lindberg was expelled from Okinawa. He was forced to abruptly leave all of his immediate family at a very young age, at the hands of a specific group of people. We are not free even though we seem like we are because the thing that happened to Lindberg occurred at an age where he was not able to control the information he was given or retained. Sigmund Freud says that, “our action are determined from psychological causes outside of us”. Lindberg was justifiably and angry and disturbed child considering his environment. He watched his mother get passed around by men, and was abandoned by his father as a boy. Sigmund Freud would believe that because of these various factors, Gunner Lindberg was determined to commit the action that he did as an adult. Freud would argue that as a child, Lindberg was deprived of various tools necessary for him to know how to behave appropriately and adequately in society. Because, he was never disciplined or shown an adequate amount of attention, as indicated in the article, it was not his decision to behave as he did. Libertarianism conflicts with the idea of determinism. This view would say that Gunner Jay Lindberg was fully liberal to make all the decisions that he made. Jean Paul Satre says that, “we have the ability to... make ‘being possible’ through our choices.” We have full and entire control over want we want or do not want to occur. Lindberg’s past is irrelevant to his future. Satre believes there is no future and we essentially create as we go. Compatiblism is another view that redefines freedom and critiques determinism. Immanuel Kant argues compatibalism. He believes that our actions are based on the way that we perceive ourselves. Therefore, the way we perceive ourselves dictates the way we behave. Ultimately, we decide our destiny, outcome, and behaviours. However Jean Paul Satre’s view is disabled to the fact that children are not capable of controlling the situations that they are subject to. Satre’s idea that we can make anything possible through our choices suggests that the emotions we feel in reaction to the things that we experience are entirely our fault. It would be completely illogical to believe that Lindberg, as a 12 year old boy, made a conscious choice to feel hurt and upset
