Greg Detre
15/6/01
I need to think more about the compatibilist response
how come the children and the insane are excused?
no metaphsyical claims
if identify with first order desires
Dennett: free will moral responsibility = the capacity to act on reasons
non-determinists � intelligibility
randomness doesn't help either
worry about the coherence of free will as incompatibilists understand it
they want agents to be creators of their own wills without quantum randomness
for Frankfurt, it doesn't matter where the 2nd order desires come from � they don't have to be self-formed
2nd + 3rd order desires are fixed in determinism too
what matters is being the kind of person who values stuff � 2nd order desires ≈ value
if you�re complicated enough � - Dennett
incopmatibilist � even if you�re not causally responsible, you need to be responsible for your desires
or: be a hard determinist � radically modify practices (although of course that choice would be determined too J)
Strawson � defends a kind of compatibilism
can't give up the practice of holding each other responsible
vindication for compatibilist way of behaving
sceptical doubts are idle � Humean
determinism � everything is causally necessitated
fatalism = whatever you decide, things�ll turn out the same
e.g. Calvinist about going to heaven
determinists aren't necessarily fatalists
that�s why they don't mind discussion of free will
ER is not deterministic � it�s about repetition
no guiding principle � society juggles through consensus
the right to life � not absolute???
infringe through inaction
oright not to be killed � pretty absolute
act utilitarianism � multi-level
it�s sometimes ok to think in a non-utilitarian way
but the right act is still in terms of maximum utility
can you not frame justice as leading to an absolute right???
justify the virtues by consensus
the virtuous man would act as though in accordance with these virtues
consensus is a weak justification
Aristotle: his virtues � arete/ergon
MacIntyre: quest for the good
what about arete for a society???
Fukuyama
free will: control + choice������� non-determinism
how specify the libertarian self???
why aren't rights the background to positive law???
need to establish the positive laws first
rule utilitarianism might be able to acknowledge absolute moral duties
no positive laws really in utilitarianism
Kantianism � 2nd CI is easier as a right
rights protect oru status as ends in ourselves
virtue � I have a right to be treated as a virtuous person would treat us
if we have a right, does everyone have a duty to promote my right etc.???
do I have a right to a cure for my rare disease???
does my right to life outweigh subsidising the arts etc.???
right to be entertained from taxes???