Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

48 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
What does Becca's brain do?
No moral responsibility?
Hard Determinism
Moral responsibility?
Soft Determinism
Prescriptive Laws
governmental laws
(directing out behavior)
ie speed limit
Descriptive Laws
Laws of Nature
(doesn't enforce anything)
ie gravity
The absense of causes (James)
All events are governed by causal laws
View that some specified events must occur in a person's life no matter what they choose to do.
Hard Determinism
No moral responsibility
No praise/reward
Soft Determinism
Moral responsibility
because of freedom of action
aka Compatibilism
Causal laws
inevitable patterns in nature (inevitable causes and effects)
2 Ways moral responsibility works with determinism
1)Compatibilism: (if free will = freedom of action. [you intended to do it] not 'did the event have a cause)

2)Justice/punishment are justified because they become causes for people not to break a law. -- good for society.
NOT ALL events are governed by causal laws.

there is sometimes a break in the causal chain.
Free Will
At least some human CHOICES are not governed by causal laws.

"contra-causal freedom"
"Contra-causal freedom"
Free Will
Freedom of Action
Ability to perform whatever physical actions one wishes to perform.
People beleive in free will because (2)
1)They feel free (BUT could be because of freedom of action)

2)"self within self", the "I"
"self within self"
the smaller self within you.
makes the final decision when deliberating
"self within self" REFUTED
1)"self within self" has thoughts and feelings: [same problem we began with]

2) "self within self" DOESN'T have its own thoughts: [seems like just a blind reflex/impulse]
Beleif in free will (same as indeterminism for our purposes)
Fatalism example with Q
dream of medeival town
devil says he'll get him at midnight
die at midnight no matter what he does/where he is
'Determinism v Indeterminism / free will dispute' is a semantic problem only (a verbal problem)
some actions are both determined and free-->if the action is a necessary result of internal forces
Soft Determinism
Simple Indeterminism
the theory that actions are free because they don't have causes (Taylor thinks James is a simple indeterminist)
in relation to
[anti reductionistic]: you can't have a complete understanding by understanding parts

[taylor]:you can't understand who a person is by a listing of personality traits, its their interconnection.
a reductionistic view
complex systems can be completely understood by gaining understanding of its parts
"an event happening by chance is just as understandable as one by necessity "
what is James' reason for indeterminism being more plausible than determinism
judgements of regret
why is indeterminism necessary according to james
it gives hope
you need wrong ways possible to be excited about a right way
gives willingness to act
who clarifies the meaning of chance

chance=possibilities outnumber actualities
James' main argument for indeterminism
-determinists think that indeterminism=chance=chaos.
-they think chance has a positive definition, when it is a NEGATIVE DEFINITION.
-Lacking causes= chance
-SO chance doesn’t bring about chaos, just doesn’t bring about a predictable pattern
-If there is no chance it can’t play an active role
-CHANCE means that possibilities outnumber actualities
James' thoughts on regret
-regret makes indeterminism more plausible than determinism
-determinists must regret regret (only way to end cycle is to become a determinist)
a determinist defends regret
-counters james
regrets are the cause for not repeating an action—learning opportunities
the determinist/indeterminist argument is NOT due to words but is a dispute of facts
James says
looking into your past does what?
it doesn't help with either argument.
knowing what happened doesn't tell us if something else could have happened.
facts only prove facts
facts don't have to do with the argument, possibilities do.
indeterminists & determinists are
monists (determinists)
pluralists (indeterminists)
james uses ex of divinity and oxford street how?
before he chose a street the other seemed just as plausible (determinists suck)

if you rewind time who's to say you wouldn't randomly choose the other street?

looking back in your memory doesn't mean that other options weren't possibilities before a choice was made

its only after a choice is made that the other options become impossible
"The dispute of free will is a VERBAL one due to confusion of words"
what is free will according to stace
-find the definition in common usage of the word
--free will is not whether an action is determined by a cause, but what KIND of cause it has.
Free actions and unfree actions have causes. Moral responsibility depends on the kind of cause
man in desert

example of what?
staces view of free v unfree acts

ghandi acted of own free will [morally responsible]
man in desert doesn't act freely [not morally responsible]
"free will has nothing to do with whether or not you have control over your choices (ie indeterminism v determinism)"
"freewill exists and is COMPATIBLE with determinism
and therefore also compatible with moral responsibility/punishment."
what causes stace to think that the issue of free will being compatible with determinism is fake
professors of philosophy deny free will in the classroom but act as if it exists in life
==the problem is not real
====the problem is merely a verbal one
whats staces example for the incorrect definition of free will
ex 1)someone thought "man" was defined as a 5-legged animal and then denied the existence of man

same as philosophers denying the existence of free will

ex 2) murder trial someone confesses ("not of their own free will" they say) because an officer threatened to beat him.
philosopher in jury says this is irrelevent bc free will doesn't exist
-others conclude jury member is using the incorrect definition of the word.