View Single Post
Old 08-06-2019, 08:46 PM
monstro is offline
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 20,784
Originally Posted by monstro
Really? You've never heard someone argue that a person shouldn't be held responsible for his crimes by reason of insanity or mental impairment? You've never heard of juveniles getting lighter sentences than adults based on the argument that "they don't know better"?

You've never heard someone try to excuse their behavior by saying they were drunk, sleep-waking, or blind with rage at the time?

If you have heard these things, then you've heard "hints".
Originally Posted by begbert2
None of that has anything at all to do with free will. Not even slightly.
Oh really?

Free will and the Criminal Justice System

Free will and psychiatric assessments of criminal responsibility: a parallel with informed consent

Neuroscience, Free Will, and CriminalResponsibility

The Illusion of Free Will and Mental Illness Stigma

Human Biology and Criminal Responsibility: Free Will or Free Ride?


You can disagree with me all you want, but it is wrong to argue that nothing I've said relates to free will--or more precisely, how plenty of people through history have conceptualized free will. If you continue to dismiss me like this, I will be compelled to ignore you since I don't want to spend a whole lot of time educating you on the entirety of the discourse.

Originally Posted by begbert2
I'm really having a hard time even articulating your version of free will. It's like you think that when a person is annoyed, free will shuts off on account of...what? Free will only being possible if you're coldly logical or free of emotion?
You don't understand what I'm talking about if you think I've been talking about "free will shutting off". So maybe you need to stop lecturing me about what is and isn't free will (and so confidently!) and simply ask for clarification.

To clarify (since you're confused): I think the notion of free will that most people have is bullshit. That notion being that we can make decisions free (free is supposed to mean something!!) from biological constraints, both known and unknown. And no, I don't consider all of one's brain to be them. No one really does. No one pats themselves on the back for their awesome peristalasis. The brain does all matter of things a person isn't aware of, that they aren't in control of. I personally think that is a disingenuous cop-out to argue that involuntary processes are free will. Because that means humans are no different than amoebas in the will department. And no one believes we make have the same will as amoebas.

The whole "free will" concept was invented so we could see ourselves differently (better than) all other life forms. The concept is used to distinguish organisms that do things "unthinkingly" from those that do. And it has been logically extended to distinguish people with impairments or undeveloped executive functioning from healthy, mature individuals. I'm sorry if this is all brand new to you, but that's really not my problem.