Final answer:
The problem of induction by David Hume suggests the possibility of free will since causality is not deductively justified. This philosophical debate continues as the nature of free will is explored.
Step-by-step explanation:
The argument that David Hume presents regarding the problem of induction challenges the validity of causality and by extension, determinism. The claim is that since causality isn't deductively justified, determinism, which relies on causality, isn't justified either. Thus, the possibility of free will being real exists. In philosophy, this forms a cornerstone of debates concerning free will vs. determinism.
Baron D'Holbach's hard determinism suggested that all human actions are governed by natural laws, making them predictable, like physical objects subjected to the law of gravity. Indeterminism, offered by William James and others, counters by suggesting that not all effects in the universe are causally determined, leaving room for free will. Soft determinists or compatibilists like Hume argue that actions caused by internal states can still be considered free.
Regardless of determinist or indeterminist leanings, the question about the true nature of free will remains a subject of philosophical debate. The consideration of causal determinacy from past events and the possibility of uncaused events both contribute to this ongoing discourse.