There is a clear connection between free will and moral responsibility. The common sense view -- and one shared by many philosophers -- is that without the capacity to choose to act otherwise than we in fact do, we cannot be held morally responsible for our actions. To put it another way, if you couldn't have done any differently, then how can we hold you responsible? But is that the case? Even if a person does what they did because of past circumstances and deterministic laws, shouldn't we still hold that person morally responsible for their actions?

"I would argue that determinism is compatible with free will. Determinism is human beings choices and decisions that have sufficient causes and natural laws. While free will is the choice and is not simply determined by physical or divine forces? They appear to be compatible on two separate levels. One being that you are able to make a decision without the forcible effect of other person or influence of outside parties. Next, they are compatible because of the free will and natural laws a decision can be made with the option of there being a alternate decision that could have been made instead of the other. Those are just two examples of how I feel that determinism is compatible with free will. What do you think? Are they incompatible or compatible why or why not?"

Solution Preview

This material may consist of step-by-step explanations on how to solve a problem or examples of proper writing, including the use of citations, references, bibliographies, and formatting. This material is made available for the sole purpose of studying and learning - misuse is strictly forbidden.

The connection between free will and moral responsibility seems to be that when we have the capacity (e.g., the freedom) to choose otherwise we should be held morally responsible. While I think this condition holds for ninety-nine percent of most acts people carry out, there are still a few troubling cases that question this logic. As I said, most of the time we can think of cases where the person could have acted otherwise. For example, the company I work for pays me one hundred dollars more than what I actually worked. I could inform the supervisor of the issue and have my pay deducted, or I can choose otherwise...

This is only a preview of the solution. Please use the purchase button to see the entire solution

Assisting Tutor

Related Homework Solutions

Study Guide on the Textbook: Doing Philosophy 5th Edition, Schrick and Vaughn
Homework Solution
2.1 Cartesian Dualism: Ms <---> Nonphysical substance that interacts with the body. Body and mind and different substances. Conclusion: Descartes deductive arguments are valid but unsound. Empirically speaking there is no immaterial substance. Thus
Descartes and Hume
Homework Solution
General Philosophy
Problems of History
Freedom of Will
Get help from a qualified tutor
Live Chats