Determinism & Incompatiblism

3328 Words14 Pages
Determinism & Incompatiblism Respective Negations and Moral Implications In the following treatise, we shall explore the metaphysical themes of compatiblism, determinism, libertarian free will, and their respective negations (where applicable). In addition, we will examine the supposed moral implications of adopting these views, such as, moral responsibility, the proper assessment of criminal behaviour, justification for punishment, and the like. Moreover, certain metaphysical views will undergo examination and summary given; in order to greater understand their roles within society. Similarly, moral inferences will be illustrated and scrutinized where necessary. Furthermore, an opinion piece regarding the adoption of a particular metaphysical notion will be voice, and placed under inspection for error. The first metaphysical view we shall examine is compatiblism. Compatiblism, in a broad sense of the word, is a notion which allows the belief in determinism and free will alike. That is, any free will that one may truly consider ‘worth having’ (Kane 32-33). Following this understanding, we may find such a notion contained within Kane’s first case study, which indentified a young man, troubled by past (determined) circumstance, and who supposedly (freely) chose his tragic fate (Kane 68). In this case [of the Oklahoma bombing], for example, we are presented that McVeigh’s actions, and thereby the responsibility for his actions, rest in majority with him. This verdict is derived from observations illustrating that many individuals are rejected from the Special Forces each year, and that numerous anti-Government agencies exist within the United States, but they do not retaliate violently. It is then fair to conclude, according to Kane, that a jury would reason McVeigh “did what he did of his own free will” (Kane 68). Upon reflection, we may consider this to be a

More about Determinism & Incompatiblism

Open Document