Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Desert claims presuppose robust metaphysical free will, which hard determinists like Derk Pereboom argue is empirically undermined.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Desert can rest on compatibilist freedom: agents deserve blame when they act on their own desires and reasoning.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Neuroscientific evidence of prior brain activity doesn't prove consciousness plays no role in decision-making causation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Practical accountability systems (justice, praise, blame) require only agent control over behavior, not metaphysical libertarianism.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Neuroscience shows brain activity precedes conscious decisions, undermining the libertarian free will desert requires.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If all events follow from prior causes and physical laws, agents lack the control necessary to deserve praise or blame.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Desert judgments attribute moral responsibility presupposing agents could have acted otherwise—impossible under determinism.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.