aleph_0 Posted August 8, 2008 Report Share Posted August 8, 2008 There is an argument which I have seen in several discussions of free will, which many believe points out an inherent contradiction in the behavior of people who deny free will. It is the claim that, if you reject free will, then you cannot criticize a person, nor command him, nor judge him, without contradiction. For when you criticize a person, you must necessarily expect that person to choose to consider your criticism, and then—assuming he is rational and well-intentioned—choose to change. Likewise, if you command someone, you expect or hope that he will obey; and if you judge a person, you imply that he might have chosen to be different. However, for a person who denies free will, a criticism may simply be an expression which he hopes will change the behavior of the person to whom he speaks, even if genuine choice is not involved. Moreover, many people express criticisms when they do not expect their expressions to produce anything positive—they merely express criticism because it feels good to “let it out”. Likewise, one might utter a command, “Please bring me a drink,” with the expectation that the person will bring a drink, regardless of the assumption that he did so by means of volition. And in general, I do not believe that a person who accepts free will, must necessarily behave significantly differently from the person who denies it, nor does he imply a contradiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidOdden Posted August 8, 2008 Report Share Posted August 8, 2008 If anyone says "you can't criticize someone", there is a presupposition, namely "and be rational". Metaphysically speaking, it is quite possible to criticize a person of doing things that they didn't do or to criticize a non-existent being. But that is irrational behavior. It is irrational to criticize another person't behavior, if you assume they do not have free will, since the purpose of criticism is to cause a change in behavior by appealing to reason. If you deny reason and free will, it is irrational to depend on it to attempt to change a person's conduct. It is also irrational to "just let it out". It is sufficient to just think these thoughts; but of course it is irrational since it is like mentally criticizing the rain for existing. People who criticize others do not actually and honestly deny free will, they merely pretend to do so. If they were sincere, they would not even have these irrational thoughts that some other peron actually had some control over his actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrassDragon Posted August 8, 2008 Report Share Posted August 8, 2008 It is irrational to criticize another person't behavior, if you assume they do not have free will, since the purpose of criticism is to cause a change in behavior by appealing to reason. I don't agree with this. If you believe that people behave deterministically and do not have free will or the ability to use reason, you might still criticize someone, with the hope of deterministically "forcing" them to change their behavior - since it is obvious that criticism often does "result" in a change in behavior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aleph_0 Posted August 8, 2008 Author Report Share Posted August 8, 2008 I don't agree with this. If you believe that people behave deterministically and do not have free will or the ability to use reason, you might still criticize someone, with the hope of deterministically "forcing" them to change their behavior - since it is obvious that criticism often does "result" in a change in behavior. Quite right, though I would add that you need not even believe in determinism. Indeterminism would work just as well, and still reject both determinism and free will. But the spirit of what you point out is what I am arguing here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fletch Posted August 9, 2008 Report Share Posted August 9, 2008 If you believe that people behave deterministically and do not have free will or the ability to use reason, you might still criticize someone, with the hope of deterministically "forcing" them to change their behaviorBut how would a person who lacked free will or the ability to use reason be any different than, say, a dog? You can get a dog to change its behavior, but any judgement you might make as to the animals behavior is in relation to your commands. In other words, you would be judging him based upon his adherence to your will, not his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrassDragon Posted August 9, 2008 Report Share Posted August 9, 2008 But how would a person who lacked free will or the ability to use reason be any different than, say, a dog? Not sure that they would be under this hypothetical scenario - but I, personally, think humans have free will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts