The excerpt I chose was “Free Will versus Determinism”, and I noticed from the beginning the piece was written with reasons to support the content. First, the presentation introduces two beliefs; the behavior of atoms is governed entirely by physical law, and humans have free will. Immediately after presenting these ideas and questioning the relations in the two, the excerpt explains the logical approach to why they do not necessarily favor one another.
Any argument that is presented, or comparison of two aspects, needs facts and reasons to confirm why the person is trying to convince the reader or other person that the argument is supported. Referring to the two beliefs presented at the beginning of the excerpt, the piece supports the idea that the behavior of atoms is governed entirely by physical law and humans have free will do not have a congruent relationship. Atoms will do what they have to do because of physical law and its determination of what each atom will do in the given circumstances.
This is fact which is presented clearly and holds accuracy. An interpretation of the example given would be is if an atom does Z in circumstance Q, then circumstance Q will result in the atom having to do Z. By physical law, one cannot predict, change, or control what atoms do and how they do what they do. Continuing on to the next segment of the excerpt, it explains that free will is what happens, but did not necessarily have to happen. Unlike atoms and how they are governed by physical law, free will is something that has to be invoked by a human.
Choice is the root in free will and what a person chooses to do will have a result. In this second part I began to see the argument because it was the comparison to the first fact presented, and reasons are given for why the argument is being made. A quote is written into the conclusion that points out that humans have free will to a certain degree, but it does not relate to how atoms are governed. The strengths that I found were the facts presented and the explanation of the material.
Also I like the order in which the excerpt was written. The two beliefs were first, followed by the questioning of validation and reasons why the two beliefs did not fit well together as one belief. I could not identify any weaknesses in the excerpt, or parts that were irrelevant. As stated before the segment was factual, and the reasons were enough to convince the reader that the theory presented is accurate. References: Moore-Bruder, (2008). Philospophy (7th ed. ). : The McGraw-Hill Companies.