3.1
Causal Determinism (C-->E + LN) and Hard determinism (the doctrine that there are no free actions).
Hard determinism assumes that: if CD is true ---> -Fw
As our bodies made up of matter, we must be subjects to the same laws of causation which apply to all matter.
In addition, if HD is true ---> -HR (there's no human responsibility) if we are not free, we cannot be responsible for our actions (since one is responsible if and only if one can make choices).
Soft determinism: Determined actions can nevertheless be free.
1- Traditional Compatibilism (Free actions are 1- caused by one's will and 2- not externally constrained). The reasoning is this:
Principle of alternative possibilities: one can be held responsible for doing something only if one could have done otherwise. "could have done otherwise."
which means "if you had chosen otherwise, then you would have done otherwise."
Think of this example: a student being late for class. He chooses ( A) "having coffee with lots of traffic," instead of (B) "not having coffee and no traffic." For Traditional Compatibilism the student is responsible for being late since "if he had choosen (B) instead of (A), he would have been on time for class.
C/E "Taylor's Ingenious Physiologist. Here the physiologist plants desires in the subject and he acts on these desires. But the desires are not his. This brings the problem that not all of our desires at a given time are necessarily ours.
Taylor is also getting at the fact that there are internal constraints one may not be aware of. Take for example phobias and addictions. These may not be external constraints.
Punishment: How do compatibilists see punishment? Take a look at p. 203. Punishment cannot be retributive (eye-for-an-eye). The only legitimate way of punishment is rehabilitation and deterrence. Criminal actions are dictated by genes and habits (nature and nurture). Retributive punishment makes sense if it's deserved. But according to the Compatibilist nothing people do is really up to them.
Punishment is good as education. It can teach criminals their error and help rehabilitate them.
3.3 Libertarianism
You should know the difference between "event causation" and "agent causation."
synaptic activity is event causation. mental states causing synaptic activity is agent causation.
Libertarianism holds that agents can cause events. How? Well, our actions are under our control because they are caused by ourselves.
Keep in mind that acting freely requires deciding for yourself what desires you're going to act on. If your actions are based on desires that have been programmed into you from without, then you don't act freely.
There are two arguments here:
Argument from Experience. Argument from deliberation. In class I called it argument from experience, because you experience it from the inside. You feel you wanted to come to class, you got ready, drove through rush hour and got to the class on time. You feel you chose that. You are responsible for that action.
Read pages 216 and 217! For the libertarian if the wants you act on are not yours, you are not free and therefore not responsible. If you declared nursing as a major because it's the dream of your parents that doesn't automatically make you free.That may not be your desire. In fact you may not even know what you really want!
Libet's Neurophysiological challenge: it seems to show that consciousness of a decision arises only after the decision has already been made (the 300 millisecond gap between the decision to press the button and the brain signal).
Rebuttal by libertarians: There's a difference between making a "conscious decision" and a "meta-conscious decision" (meta-conscious awareness is second order). For the libertarian, the subject in Libet's report is not having a "conscious" but a "meta-conscious" decision. So it's no surprise that it happens "after" the conscious decision was made.
