Philosophy Test: incompatibilism: the view that compatibism is false.

For all tense and purposes the world is deterministic. if determinism is true, and it seems to be, everything that happens, has to happen and everything you do makes in inevitable you make that choice. it seems clear that under those circumstances, it isnt really possible for anyone to be free. incompatible: two statements are incmpatible if its impossible for both of them to be simultaneously true. Two statements are compatible i its possible for both of them to be simultaneously true. Compatlism:the view that freedom and determinism can co-exist, i,e. that it is possible for people to be free in deterministic. locke: an action is free if it is the result of a choice on the part of the agent (the person who commits the action) a corollary; one is free to the extent that ones actions result from one choices, and one is unfree to the extent that ones actions do not so result According to locke, freedom is being to do what you choose to do. imporant point: one chooses to act, one doesnt chooses to choose 2. freedom is a property, not of choices, but of actions. 3. freedom is a relations between choice and action, not between subject and choice. since how things are, etermines how things will be...we are able to control and its only because of that fact we are able to control. because we are connected to our bodies, we are able to control. lockes analysis is ok, locke has identified one important kind of freedom, bodily freedom/freedom from external inhibitory facts etc. But what about psychological freedom? what about "autonomy?" is all freedom identical with the freedom to execute ones choices? (Locke doesnt consider this question, but if he had, he would have said "no." or is there some other kind of freedom? (frankfurt says "yes") he agrees with what locke says, he thinks if you arent able to do the things you wanna do, you are not free ex, if you are shackled to a wall. franfurt says there is more to freedom than being restrained.

frankfurt beleives there is a sense that choice can be free or unfree. if you are a amazing music composer, but he has an heroin addiction. but what you really wanna do is compose music and you are really good at it, however, you have this terrible addiction to heroin, but if you do you would be out of order for a day or so. you have a choice, compose music, or do heroin. one of those desires, reflects what you believe to be of value, you dont believe heroin has value but you want to do it. frankfurt: in order for an action to be free, it must satify two ocnditions: (i) it must be th result of a decision on the part of the agent (so to thi extent, Frankfurt agrees with Locke); and (ii) the decision in question mst be in alighment with what the agent really values and, more gnerally, who the agent really is. For frankfurt, freeactions have to be rooted in stable, coherent, enduring psychological structures. ego-dystonic vs ego-syntoc: for frankfurt, free action cannot be ego dystonic. ego-sytonic, they do identify with there symptoms. according to franfurt, actions that result from ego- dystonic choices are not free, in other words, if you dont indetify wiht the choice youre making, and on which you are acting. than the ensugin act is not a freeone. the compuoser/heroin user doesnt idenftu with what hes doing )when hes shooting heroin); he sees it as a case of his identity being commandeered or taken over by something alien to it. But that same person does identify with what hes doing when he compses; he sees his actions (in that context) as being onces of which he is the sole author and with which he can fully identify.

Humanitarian intervention: the threast or use of force across state border by a state or group of states aimed at preventing or eding widespread and grave the UN has 4 major situatinos inw hcih hunamtiarisn is warrned

1. ethnic cleaning 2. genocide 3. war crimes ` 4. crimes against humanity repobsbilty to protect R2P non bindining internation agreement by the UN and its memebers, promoting humanitarian sageguards and prevention -started as an honest effort 3 major aspects: 1.prevent 2. reaction to crimes against humanity 3. rebuild just war theorys - moral abhorrence towards war with a readiness to accetp that war may sometimes be necessary it has a just cause, waranted agression comparative justics lefitmate authority

mian differences betwew locke and frankfurt: locke says if your doing what you wanna, than your free. freankfurt says that your desires reflect in who you are. if your heart isnt in the decision into what your doing, than your not really free. ex, if you are in a marriage and you arent really happy in and you just go along with you, the idea is that even if you choose to stay married than you arent really because your heart isnt entirely in it. determinism and incompatibism differences: determinism is that everything is pre determined that everything that happens is a result of an inevitable, incompabism is the idea that you cant have free will in a determinisc world, there cannot be freedom in a determintic world. catogorical imperative- is a rule that one ought ot follow under all circumstances, ex one should not oblirate the univere hypotheical- follow if you have a certain objects, so its objective that you go to the gym etc.. if jerry is a bird, than jerry has feather, i the statement has if, than its a hypotheical statements, its just not true.

the if part of a hypotheical statement, if jerry is a the antecdent than jerry has feathers is the consequent. emotivism: something is right or wrong is expressing your emotional feeling about that thing, the consquence is that im not really saying anything, im just expressing feelings. ethical statements are ways of expressing emotions, so emotivist deny there are ethical truths, they thing they are catagorically not true and not false, but they are not statements, they are hollow. doctrine that ethical statemnts say nothing but do show or express feelings.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful