Monitoring Desk
Can we reconcile the idea that we are free and responsible agents with the idea that what we do is determined according to natural laws?
For centuries, philosophers have tried in different ways to show that we can. Hilary Bok takes a fresh approach here, as she seeks to show that the two ideas are compatible by drawing on the distinction between practical and theoretical reasoning.
Bok argues that when we engage in practical reasoning — the kind that involves asking “what should I do?” and sifting through alternatives to find the most justifiable course of action — we have reason to hold ourselves responsible for what we do. But when we engage in theoretical reasoning — searching for causal explanations of events — we have no reason to apply concepts like freedom and responsibility.
Bok contends that libertarians’ arguments against “compatibilist” justifications of moral responsibility fail because they describe human actions only from the standpoint of theoretical reasoning. To establish this claim, she examines which conceptions of freedom of the will and moral responsibility are relevant to practical reasoning.
Courtesy: (Arabnews)
PARIS (AFP): French lawmakers urged a social media ban for under-15s and "digital curfew" for…
LONDON (AFP): Chelsea were charged by the Football Association on Thursday with 74 alleged breaches…
Osama Al-Sharif This September could be the cruelest of months for the Palestinians — an…
Mansoor Adayfi For many years, I have been asked whether I could forgive those who…
Dr. Azeem Ibrahim Eight years after nearly 1 million Rohingya fled Myanmar to escape mass…
BARCELONA: Spanish Sports Minister Pilar Alegria has said Israeli teams should be banned from sport…
This website uses cookies.