Skip to main content

Abstract

Peter Strawson (1962) argued that the truth of determinism would not threaten our reactive attitudes, e.g., resentment, or our normative practices, e.g., punishment, though these presuppose (indeterministic) free will, because they are too entrenched. If autonomous agency presupposes an agent-self, however, the same concern faces the issue of the resilience of belief in an agent-self. If belief in agency would persist in the face of determinism, would belief in the agent-self? If not, what are the likely consequences? Buddhist practice is depicted as the path from allegedly erroneous belief in the conventional agent-self to the ultimately enlightening realization of no-self, with meditation as the primary means for directly experiencing that ultimate reality. One largely unnoticed problem with this view is that analysis of Buddhist claims suggests the opposite: that ordinary people do not have an agent-self nor agency, but that the Buddha had an agent-self and agency, and that Buddhist practice increases agency, thus selfhood. Another problem is that Buddhist practice might not uncover the unreality of self, but disassemble a pre-existing self. And, among other problems, it is possible that the no-self doctrine would disempower individuals, threaten individual wellbeing, and lead to antisocial behavior. Such problems are examined here.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For a collection of criticisms, see Purser et al. (2016); for a reply to such criticisms, see Repetti (2016).

  2. 2.

    See Repetti (2019) for an in-depth critique of Harris’s argument.

  3. 3.

    This interestingly parallels the shift from pre-conventional to conventional developmental stages in moral psychology.

  4. 4.

    Frankfurt (1971) identifies personhood with having a metavolitional hierarchy such that, ideally, we enact only those desires we approve.

  5. 5.

    Frankfurt (1988) argues that those volitions we identify with and those we dissociate from (“externalize”) characterize the process of self-formation and personal identity.

  6. 6.

    See also Brent (2018) for an application of this reasoning against the Buddhist no-self doctrine.

  7. 7.

    See Repetti (2019) for an in-depth exploration of this possibility.

  8. 8.

    For a critique of this “consciousness epiphenomenalism”, see Repetti (2019).

  9. 9.

    That is the Mahāyāna view; some early Buddhists see ultimate reality as the micro-level at which momentary atomistic psychophysical tropes are the ultimately real building blocks of conventional reality (Siderits 2017).

  10. 10.

    For an excellent collection of essays on whether awareness implies a self, see Siderits et al. (2013). For a comprehensive collection of essays on divergent Buddhist views of free will and agency, see Repetti (2017a). 

References

  • Brent, M. 2017. Agent-causation as a solution to the problem of action. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 47 (5): 656–673.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2018. Confessions of a deluded Westerner. Journal of Buddhist Ethics 25: 687–713.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breyer, D. 2013. Freedom with a Buddhist face. Sophia 52 (2): 359–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caruso, G. 2018. Skepticism about moral responsibility. In Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/skepticism-moral-responsibility.

  • Catto, J. 2019. Becoming nobody: everybody’s busy being somebody. Film. Love Serve Remember Foundation with Google Empathy Lab, Ojai.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cozort, D. 2017. Foreword. In Buddhist perspectives on free will: agentless agency? ed. R. Repetti, xvi–xvii. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1990. Flow: the psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frankfurt, H. 1971. Freedom of the will and the concept of the person. Journal of Philosophy 68: 5–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1988. Identification and externality. In The importance of what we care about, ed. H. Frankfurt, 58–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, J. 2015. Engaging Buddhism: why it matters to philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, S. 2013. Free will. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, P. 2017. Psychological versus metaphysical agents: a Theravāda Buddhist view of free will and moral responsibility. In Buddhist perspectives on free will: agentless agency? ed. R. Repetti, 158–169. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kushnir, T., A. Gopnik, N. Chemyak, et al. 2015. Developing intuitions about free will in children ages four and six. Cognition 138: 79–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, N., D. Rigoni, and K. Vohs. 2017. Free will beliefs predict attitudes toward unethical behavior and criminal punishment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114 (28): 7325–7330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McRae, E. 2017. Emotions and choice: lessons from Tsongkhapa. In Buddhist perspectives on free will: agentless agency? ed. R. Repetti, 170–181. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyers, K. 2017. Grasping snakes: reflections on free will, samadhi, and dharmas. In Buddhist perspectives on free will: agentless agency? ed. R. Repetti, 182–192. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2018. Talking past each other? Reply to Rick Repetti. Journal of Buddhist Ethics 25: 961–987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nozick, R. 1981. Philosophical explanations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pereboom, D. 2001. Living without free will. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Purser, R. 2019. McMindfulness: how mindfulness became the new capitalist spirituality. London: Repeater Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Purser, R., and D. Loy. 2013. Beyond McMindfulness. Huff. Post, July 1, 2013. www.huffingtonpost.com/ron-purser/beyond-mcmindfulness_b_3519289.html. Accessed 1 Oct 2019.

  • Purser, R., D. Forbes, and A. Burke, eds. 2016. Handbook of mindfulness: culture, context and social engagement. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Repetti, R. 2010a. The counterfactual theory of free will: a genuinely deterministic form of soft determinism. Saarbrücken: LAP Lambert Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010b. Meditation and mental freedom: a Buddhist theory of free will. Journal of Buddhist Ethics 17: 165–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2016. Meditation matters: replies to the anti-McMindfulness bandwagon! In Handbook of mindfulness: culture, context and social engagement, ed. R. Purser, D. Forbes, and A. Burke, 473–493. New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • ———., ed. 2017a. Buddhist perspectives on free will: agentless agency? London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017b. Why there ought to be a Buddhist theory of free will. In Buddhist perspectives on free will: agentless agency? ed. R. Repetti, 22–33. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017c. Agentless agency: the soft compatibilist argument from Buddhist meditation, mind-mastery, evitabilism, and mental freedom. In Buddhist perspectives on free will: agentless agency? ed. R. Repetti, 193–206. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2019. Buddhism, meditation, and free will: a theory of mental freedom. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siderits, M. 2017. Buddhist paleocompatibilism. In Buddhist perspectives on free will: agentless agency? ed. R. Repetti, 133–147. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siderits, M., E. Thompson, and D. Zahavi, eds. 2013. Self, no self? Perspectives from analytical, phenomenological, and Indian traditions. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strawson, P. 1962. Freedom and resentment. Proceedings of the British Academy 48: 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strawson, G. 2017. Free will and the sense of self. In Buddhist perspectives on free will: agentless agency? ed. R. Repetti, 72–83. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rick Repetti .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Repetti, R. (2023). Selfhood and Resentment. In: Coseru, C. (eds) Reasons and Empty Persons: Mind, Metaphysics, and Morality. Sophia Studies in Cross-cultural Philosophy of Traditions and Cultures, vol 36. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13995-6_23

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics