You are on page 1of 2

Nicholas Ver Halen October 29, 2010 INDV 101 Morals on Trial We have moral responsibility whether or not hard

determinism exists. Every human being desires positive sensations and whether or not hard determinism exists everybody wants to enjoy these soothing sensations. Sensations are part of our brain chemistry and its what keeps us alive. But with positive sensations there are also negative sensations. For some people to enjoy these positive sensations they require that other people have negative sensations. The problem is that for one man to create his own positive sensation he must create a lot more negative sensations for everybody else. Such an example is the housing crises where people wanted to be wealthy and forced others to lose money. It is our moral responsibility to defend ourselves from these people through security. Sometimes you must suffer a little so that many more people can have positive sensations. This may be your job or having the inconvenience of helping somebody get back up on their feet. There is a net difference between positive and negative sensations and as long as it stays at zero or greater then you are being morally responsible. A human should feel good after the did something good even if it is their job because in the end you get paid either emotionally or with cash that brings positive human sensations. On the other hand just because you are doing your job you should not look for the quick easy way out generally that causes more trouble than is needed. People will use the excuse based on determinisms existence that what we do wrong was suppose to happen that way based on the past leading up to the specific action. Newtonian physics says that what we do is based off of a series of infinite cause and effects. So our next move and every move after that have been planned for us. The most common example is some

We must be morally responsible even if hard determinism is true. So how can you punish some one for something that was suppose to happen and could not happen any other way based on the past leading up to that action? Obviously they did everything right. We have to decide if we want to put somebody in jail even though it was already determined but we should decide to punish people so that we may enjoy more positive sensations and fewer negative sensations. As well if we punish criminals it will be less likely that others will be criminals because they will be afraid of the possible charges that will be applied if they do something wrong. Of these sensations security is the most who in a court of law says that a god told them to do what they did. Even though it was determined that a criminal would go to jail it was not known that he would go to jail. . Or at least that is the basic idea. Everybody has positive sensations and negative sensations so why should we deny our selves these positive sensations based on a future that we cannot see. Fear although it is a negative sensation can cause positive sensations in the future. When their future becomes a past their brain chemistry will have changed so that they will do things right instead of wrong. Parents should be changing them at a young age but not all parents succeed at teaching their children properly causing the children to grow up to become irresponsible adults. It is a simplified version of the hard determinist point of view where the criminal did what he was supposed to do and thus it could not happen any differently. The idea being that by putting them in a correctional facility you can bend their future towards a better life-style with fewer wrong doings so that society can live with more positive sensations. Well to put it simply as a judge you can reply by saying that you have no other choice but to put this criminal in a correctional facility whether it is a jail or an insane asylum. It doesn’t matter if it was a god or physics what he did happened exactly as it was suppose to happen.