Hi Ian,
>> Ian: >>> I am at a loss to understand how you are separating free-will from >>> responsibility (at any level, common sense, science, MoQ or >>> metaphysical in general). >> >> Steve: >> This is link is not a logical necessity because even if we accept for >> the sake of argument that determinism is true, we would have to >> imprison people who demonstrate the will to harm others. This desire >> to harm others is morally blameworthy even if the one who holds this >> desire holds it for reasons completely outside of the control of his >> consciousness. If society dropped the idea of free will, it would >> still need to carry out punishments of some criminals _because_ such >> actions have predictable effects on criminals. If we think that >> punishments will modify the behavior of criminals, we don't withhold >> them because we think that criminals have the "free will" to prevent >> the modification of their behavior. The reason we have the greatest >> concern for intentions is because intentional behavior is often >> modifiable while unintended behavior is generally less so. > > [IG] Sorry Steve, but the "punishment" or "treatment" would be > different if we saw a difference between intentional free-will actions > and subconsciously determined actions. Steve: Intentional actions are actions that are accompanied by the feeling of having willed them. An act can be considered more representative of intentions typical of a given person if they are also preceded by deliberation. (Whether this is a _free_ willing is not all that relevant since even if there is such a thing as free will its effects are certainly very very tiny. The context of the present including genetics, social situation, personal history, brain health, and on and on are likely to explain behavior to the extent an extra-added "free will" ingredient won't be worth consideration in assigning treatment for offenders.) Ian: >The "offender" - their > conscious mind - would be held wilfuly responsible in one case and > accidentally causally responsible in another. I don't see how you can > say there is no difference - you just swapped free-will vs determinism > for intented vs unintended actions. Steve: Indeed the treatment would be different depending on whether the behavior is intentional or not. There are lot of other considerations as well. Perhaps there is a brain malady. Punishment only makes sense if punishing is likely to modify behavior. Unintentional acts are extremely unlikely to be remedied by punishment. (Consider for example spanking a child for bed wetting.) In situations where we just don't know how to treat a person who has the intention to harm others, we simply have no choice but to warehouse them. It could be that they have some brain tumor or chemical imbalance or something that we don't as of yet have a way to diagnose let alone treat. Ian: >> By the way, Ian, if you are interested in what modern brain science >> has to say on the subject of free will you should check out David >> Eagleman's book "Incognito." It is a fascinating read. > > [IG] BTW, If ? What do you mean if ? > Cheeky sod. Steve: I think you are just kidding, but just in case be assured that am only suggesting this because I thought it was right up our alley based on what I know of your and your voracious reading habits. Best, Steve 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
