SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (59921)9/25/2002 10:24:50 PM
From: The Philosopher  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486
 
Yes, I was using judge in its judgmental context, as a negative.

But if there is no freewill, is it reasonable to punish murderers? We don't punish stones which fall off a cliff. We don't punish mud which slides down a hill. We don't punish meteorites which crash into the earth. We recognize that those things are not choosing to do what they do. If people have no free will, but are acting just as a meteorite is, what is the point in punishing them? They won't change because they can't.



To: epicure who wrote (59921)9/25/2002 10:27:21 PM
From: The Philosopher  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486
 
Perhaps a better example: we don't, or at least I think most people are agreed that we shouldn't, punish an infant for pooping in his diaper, even if they do it at a most inconvenient time and place. We realize they can't help it, they can't control their bodily functions yet, so we accept that it wrong to punish them.

The whole concept of punishment requires a belief in free will.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News