Implications for Determinism? Flashcards
Moral responsibility?
Moral Responsibility: Holding people morally responsible involves approval or disapproval of their actions based on moral standards. We praise or blame individuals only if they had a real choice in their actions. If hard determinism is true, people cannot act otherwise and, thus, cannot be morally responsible. According to this view, if we are strictly determined, we cannot be held accountable for our actions. Philosophers like John Hospers argue that moral choice is a matter of luck, with causes beyond a person’s control. In a notable legal case (Leopold and Loeb, 1924), the defense argued the teens’ actions were influenced by psychological and environmental factors, reducing their moral responsibility. The debate highlights the tension between determinism and moral responsibility, questioning how much we can hold ourselves or others accountable. This distinction between moral responsibility and the existence of morality itself is crucial.
Soft determinism?
Soft Determinism: Soft determinism suggests that free will is compatible with determinism. A free action is one that is voluntary and aligns with a person’s desires or true nature. Even when influenced by past events, if a person willingly performs an act, they are considered morally responsible. This view argues that if a person had chosen differently, they would have acted differently, reinforcing moral responsibility. However, it also challenges the idea of human dignity, as determinism seems to undermine personal agency and the concept of worship in religion. While soft determinism accepts causality, it maintains that morality still exists, but the ability to be held responsible is questioned when actions are determined by external or past influences.
Blame?
Blame: Holding someone morally responsible for their actions can involve retribution and justice, but under hard determinism, this becomes misdirected since individuals cannot be held morally responsible for their actions. However, hard determinism acknowledges that future behavior can be influenced by rewards and punishments through cause and effect. Punishments can help reinforce moral behavior and deter immoral acts, but the challenge is determining appropriate punishments. Honderich argues against retributive punishment, stating that causing distress to others is not justified by the satisfaction of retribution. Without assigning blame, actions may contribute to future undesirable outcomes, and the concept of predestination in religion could raise further issues regarding moral responsibility.
