Does Stace accept compatibilism?
Stace defends a version of what is sometimes called soft deter- minism or compatibilism. To make sure you understand his attempt to reconcile the operation of free will with causal determinism, be able to answer the following: Stace asserts that determinism is compatible with punishment.
What is Stace definition of free will?
1. (Stace) Free will does require that one could have done otherwise. This means that one would have done otherwise, had one chosen to. 2. (Dennett) Free will does not require that one could have done otherwise.
What is the main point WT Stace makes regarding the free will debate?
What is the main point W.T. Stace makes regarding the free will debate? -If there is no free will, there can be no morality and we should have no right telling people what they ought and ought not do.
How does WT Stace differentiate between free and unfree acts?
What is the difference between a free and an unfree act according to Stace? A free act is one that is internally motivated while an unfree act is externally motivated.
Is William James a fatalist?
William James is a fatalist. Many who reject the notion of free will think that punishing people for crimes makes no sense. James believed that indeterminism or chance alllows for the possibility of freewill.
What does WT Stace decide should be our criteria for deciding the correct definition of a term?
criterion for deciding a definition ins correct. a definition is correct if it accords with common usage. – the definition of free will as determinism is NOT common usage. Stace’s definition of freedom. as acts freely done are those whose immediate causes are psychological states in the agent.
Does WT Stace believe in free will?
In this article, W.T Stace defends the view of compatibilism, which is also known as “soft determinism.” He argues that every event in one’s life is inevitable and is the result of past affairs, which also leads him to the belief that free will is indeed consistent with determinism.
Why does Stace claim that free will and responsibility actually require determinism?
Stace then goes on to say that free will is compatible with determinism due to the fact that free acts are caused by desires and hopes, which demonstrates that the way an individual acts is determined by existing causes.
What is Walter Stace’s position on what is wrong with the traditional debate about free will?
Ayer, Walter Terence Stace, and Daniel Dennett) reject premise two, arguing that, properly understood, free will is not incompatible with determinism. According to the traditional compatibilist analysis of free will, an agent is free to do otherwise when he would have done otherwise had he wanted to do otherwise.
How does Stace characterize the dispute between free will and determinism?
The big difference between them is that Stace thinks that if determinism is true, then so much , the better for free will. Free will is not only compatible with determinism, but actually requires it. Stace claims that hard determinists, like d’ lb h ll f h d h d’Holbach, generally act as if they and others are free.
What does W.T.Stace mean by soft determinism?
In this article, W.T Stace defends the view of compatibilism, which is also known as “soft determinism.” He argues that every event in one’s life is inevitable and is the result of past affairs, which also leads him to the belief that free will is indeed consistent with determinism.
Why do we take the position of compatibilism?
Compatibilism is determinism with a slight modification for the sake of appearances and for our language use. It is a position taken because of the perceived need to have some idea of accountability or responsibility for human behavior.
Does compatibilism hold that humans have free will?
Compatibilism does not maintain that humans are free. Compatabilism does not hold that humans have free will. Compatibilism holds that:
What did the determinists say about the compatibilists?
The determinists criticize the compatibilists for for claiming that there is any freedom at all. The determinists think the compatibilists are defining freedom in a different manner in order to make the claim that there is some freedom of choice.
