Philosophy Assignment代写:自由主义

2017-02-21 13:07

尽可能清楚有力地陈述那些持有其他职位的人的主要反对意见。所以在这里我可以解释自由主义和柔性决定论。反驳那些反对。自由主义者认为,人类能够产生的行为,引发一系列的事件,因此我们是独立自治和自然因果链。 自由主义者认为自由和道德责任与决定论在逻辑上不相容的。他们认为,对于人类来说是自由的,必须有一些实例,从根本上说,人类的行动,这不是因果前因的影响。但是,如果这是真的,那么人类的意志必须服从一种特殊的解释。自由主义者似乎支持部分决定,这表明在因果过程中断。 例如,历史不是一个线性的特点,其中一个原因产生了一定的影响,如此循环往复。相反,生命可以被描述为一棵巨大的树,拥有无限数量的分支,它们分成许多可能的方向。然而,人类的行动超越因果决定论的一个可能性必须满足:我)事件本身必须是理所当然,因此随机,或ii)特定事件必须引起隋(自身原因)。 人的独立性在强烈的意义上对我们的生活有意义和重要。在一个确定的世界里,你如何让人们对道德负责?注重协商过程;没有强制或约束,然后我们自由审议可承担道德责任。自由主义者往往担心“客观的价值。” 看看凯恩菲舍尔。这是真的,我们所有的行为都是因果关系的确定。看看Widerker怎么和他谈你的举动,如果有一个公告,宇宙是确定的。你会觉得你的生活毫无意义吗? 三分之一个参数为incompatibilism世纪60年代Carl Ginet制定了现代文学中得到太多的关注。简化的论点沿着这条线运行:如果决定论是真的,那么我们就无法控制过去的事件,这些事件决定了我们现在的状态,也无法控制自然规律。既然我们不能控制这些事情,我们也就无法控制他们的后果。由于我们现在的选择和行为,在决定论下,是过去和自然规律的必然结果,那么我们就无法控制它们,因此,就没有自由意志。

Philosophy Assignment代写:自由主义

State as clearly and forcefully as you can the main objections which would be raised by those holding the other positions. So here I can explain libertarianism and soft determinism. Rebut those objections. Libertarians argue that humans are capable of originating acts, initiating a sequence of events, self-governing and thus we are independent of natural causal chains.

Libertarians maintain that freedom and moral responsibility are logically incompatible with determinism. They believe that for humans to be free, there must be some instances, fundamentally, human action, which are not the effects of causal antecedents. But if this were true, then the human will must be subject to a special kind of explanation. Libertarians seem to support partial determinism, which suggests a break in the ongoing process of cause and effect.

For instance, history is not characterized by a linear progression, whereby one cause produces certain effects and so on ad infinitum. Instead, life can be described as a vast tree with an infinite number of branches, which divide into numerous possible directions. Yet, for human action to transcend causal determinism one of two possibilities must be fulfilled: i) events themselves must be uncaused and therefore random, or ii) particular events must be causi sui (the cause of itself).

Human independence in the strong sense for our lives to be meaningful and important. How do you hold people morally responsible in a deterministic world? Focus on the deliberative process; there's no compulsion or constraint, then we're freely deliberating and thus can be held morally responsible. Libertarians often worry about “objective worth.”

Look at Kane in Fischer. It's true that all of our behaviour is causally determined. Look at Widerker and how he talks about how you'd act if there was an announcement that the universe is deterministic. Would you feel like your life is meaningless?

A third argument for incompatibilism was formulated by Carl Ginet in the 1960s and has received much attention in the modern literature. The simplified argument runs along these lines: if determinism is true, then we have no control over the events of the past that determined our present state and no control over the laws of nature. Since we can have no control over these matters, we also can have no control over the consequences of them. Since our present choices and acts, under determinism, are the necessary consequences of the past and the laws of nature, then we have no control over them and, hence, no free will.
  • 上一篇:没有了
  • 下一篇:没有了