Yes, not even the worst people you can imagine. I don’t believe in free will so I don’t view these people as ultimately responsible for what they are. They could not be otherwise and any kind of punishment carries the implicit assumption that they could but actively choose not to.
If someone intentionally causes immense suffering to others and is unable to stop that behaviour then I think these people should be locked away. Not as a punishment but to defend the innocent. If a bear wanders into a neighbourhood and mauls a person, we shoot the bear but not out of retribution. If we could tell it to go back to the forest and stay there, and it did, then it wouldn’t make much sense to follow it there and make it suffer to even things out, would it?
My worldview depends on us having free will and that we are responsible for our conscious actions, so I don’t think there’d be much of a point in engaging in a debate with you, but thank you for the civil response anyway.
So, our brains give us limited options to choose from at any given inflection point. From where in the void does that list of options spring out of for each of us? Why aren’t our lists of options identical?
Free will is a fun idea, but this is the sticking point for me: we have very limited options afforded to us at any moment regardless of how “free” we otherwise feel.
Yes, not even the worst people you can imagine. I don’t believe in free will so I don’t view these people as ultimately responsible for what they are. They could not be otherwise and any kind of punishment carries the implicit assumption that they could but actively choose not to.
If someone intentionally causes immense suffering to others and is unable to stop that behaviour then I think these people should be locked away. Not as a punishment but to defend the innocent. If a bear wanders into a neighbourhood and mauls a person, we shoot the bear but not out of retribution. If we could tell it to go back to the forest and stay there, and it did, then it wouldn’t make much sense to follow it there and make it suffer to even things out, would it?
A rabid dog doesn’t have free will, but still needs to be put down for the good of society.
Whether or not you believe in free will, crimes should be punished.
My worldview depends on us having free will and that we are responsible for our conscious actions, so I don’t think there’d be much of a point in engaging in a debate with you, but thank you for the civil response anyway.
So, our brains give us limited options to choose from at any given inflection point. From where in the void does that list of options spring out of for each of us? Why aren’t our lists of options identical?
Free will is a fun idea, but this is the sticking point for me: we have very limited options afforded to us at any moment regardless of how “free” we otherwise feel.
I’m sorry, but I really don’t have the energy for a deep free will conversation at the moment. Normally I’d love to, but today has been a tough one.