On Aug 5, 2011, at 11:58 AM, Steven Peterson wrote: > Hi dmb, > > On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 8:49 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> Steve said: >> I have always granted that most philosophers have traditionally linked the >> concepts of free will and moral responsibility. I am saying that that link >> is not necessary. It is not a logical necessity. >> >> >> dmb says: >> Okay, then please explain how it is possible to have moral responsibility >> without some kind of human agency? Go ahead. Explain how that would work. >> I'd really like to see you try to make that case. Maybe you will finally >> realize what I'm saying in the attempt to actually articulate moral >> responsibility without any kind of freedom to act. If that agency isn't >> necessary, then one plausible example is all you need. Good luck. >> >> And I do not think it's true that you've always granted this is true in most >> cases, but I'm just going to let that go. I just want you to show how it is >> logically possible. That would count as an actual argument. At this point, >> it's like that Monty Python skit where the guy pays for an argument but gets >> nothing but mere contradiction. >> >> What I find most disturbing is that you are completely unmoved by the simple >> logic of it. >> >> If we are not free to choose our actions, how can we be held responsible for >> those actions? >> >> You really don't see how it would be logically bogus to say we cannot choose >> our actions but we can be held responsible for them? >> >> Man, I just don't know how to make it any simpler or more obvious or more >> broadly supported. And you're still not persuaded. And you're amazed that >> I'm not persuaded even though you have zero pieces of evidence and your >> assertions can't pass the most basic logical standards. Dude, you got >> nothin'. Your position is so weak it can be defeated by two sentences from >> an encyclopedia. > > Steve: > Please provide those two sentences where it explains why this logical > connection is necessary. I you can do this, why have you been holding > it back from the conversation?
Steve, Dmb doesn't have a case to prove that it is a logical and necessary relationship between an agent with free will and moral responsibility. He only needs to have you running around defending yourself while he evades presenting evidence or explanation. Marsha ___ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
