On 2/23/2003 3:14:35 PM, Courtney LaFrance
wrote:
><"However, Compatiblists also
>want to be able to continue to
>believe in common sense
>morality, including holding
>wrongdoers morally responsible
>for their actions. They find
>the argument from moral
>responsibility compelling and
>reject the determinist view
>that human beings are not
>responsible for their
>actions.">
>
>I agree with this portion of
>Compatiblism completely. I
>believe that people are
>totally responsible for their
>actions. It mostly based on
>the freedom of choice. For
>example, A drunk person who
>loses control of their actions
>made the choice to inhibit the
>loss of control by consuming
>alcohol....Society
>on the other hand makes up way
>too many 'reasons' and
>'excuses' to encourage people
>to not be responsible for
>themselves. Example: People
>who were abused as children
>abuse their children. No
>excuse.

How do you distinguish between a reason and an
excuse? Determinism says that understanding
that there are reasons why people do things, and
that these reasons are the cause of their behavior,
you can't blame them for the behavior (have to
excuse it).

When you say someone made a conscious
choice, are you assuming that they could have
chosen otherwise (libertarianism) or that their
choice was neccessary and caused, yet still "free"
in the sense that they consciously wanted to do it
(compatiblism)?

Prof. Borrowdale
borrowdalej@lanecc.edu