Rousseau's argument presupposes libertarian free will without establishing the metaphysical grounds that would distinguish genuine self-determination from sophisticated stimulus-response processing.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Metaphysical grounds(The deeper philosophical foundation that would justify an idea): The fundamental reasons or explanations rooted in the basic nature of reality itself (rather than just in how things appear or work practically).
Presupposes(as describing what Plantinga's argument takes for granted): Assumes something to be true without proving it—like how an argument might presuppose that logic works, without first arguing that logic is valid.
Rousseau: Jean-Jacques Rousseau was an 18th-century Swiss-French thinker who argued that people are naturally good but corrupted by society and civilization. He believed in the "general will" of the people and that legitimate governments should reflect what ordinary citizens want, making him hugely influential on democratic and revolutionary ideas. His writings on education, freedom, and social contracts shaped modern thinking about human rights and how societies should be organized.
Stimulus-response processing(The opposite of genuine freedom; suggests behavior is just automatic reaction)

Based on where you are in your exploration