Which theory best explains the true nature of moral responsibility and its relation to human freedom and determinism--libertarianism, hard determinism or compatibilism?
People live in a culture that teaches or rather encourages individuals to have free will for their actions and take responsibility for their outcomes. However, some believe that they are not responsible for their actions because other forces take control of their decisions and actions. Thus, they think that there are antecedent forces that explain behaviors such as the laws of nature and conditioning. In the case of philosophy and moral responsibility, there is a theory based on human experience. Hard-determinism, libertarianism or compatibilism are theories that give different personal experiences descriptions. These theories describe what they perceive as the case of morality, freedom, and determinism or even lack of all. The study of morals and human freedom is hard, and often people settle for compatibilism as the best explanation of its relation to determinism and human freedom. It is undeniably true that there is the existence of a determined mind and a state of human morals and freedom.
Hard-determinism theory argues that all human actions are caused that is human activities are a response to stimuli. At one point in life, one sits downs and wonders why they did something and probably try finding an explanation to the causes of the behaviors. Determinism explains in detail why a person is behaving in a certain way and give answers about reasons that led to the decisions made. From a determinist theory argument, every event that takes place is causally determined. Notably, events are made of human thoughts, choices, and actions. Therefore, according to Lawhead all of them are casually determined
To view this post and other posts in this category please pay the amount below