The essay will then examine Hume's accounts of liberty and necessity. Examining his treatment of these concepts in the Treatise and the Enquiry and suggesting why Hume's account is so singular and why it has been influential. This section will deal with the different conceptions of liberty and Hume's idiosyncratic understanding of necessity.
Whether David Hume believes that freedom of action is sufficient for moral responsibility has become a point of much contention amongst Hume scholars. Hume's account of moral responsibility is complex. He outlines a remarkably unorthodox framework within which to understand moral sentiments and responsibility. Within this framing he addresses the problem of freedom and offers a distinct account of moral evaluation. The precise conceptual content of this account continues to be a subject of lengthy debate amongst philosophers who understand Hume as intervening as a compatibilist into the free will debate. What his compatibilism means in the context of responsibility is, however, entirely different according to naturalist and classical interpretations. Different interpretative models entail differing conceptions of Hume's theory of responsibility. To ascertain whether freedom of action is sufficient for moral responsibility it is necessary to examine both interpretations. To this end, we must also make sense of Hume's numerous ideas of freedom, his radical conception of necessity and the reconciling project which entails his categorisation as a compatibilist. Only then will it be possible truly to address what kind of freedom, or necessity, Hume understands to be the necessary condition of moral responsibility.
Before we begin an examination of Hume's work it is impo...
Only then will it be possible truly to address what kind of freedom, or necessity, Hume understands to be the necessary condition of moral responsibility.
Before we begin an examination of Hume's work it is important first to define the terms of the debate. What is in question here is the relationship between freedom and responsibility - two familiar notions that are, still, heavily disputed. If we are to address the free will debate through the lens of freedom we must see that there are, in essence, two central kinds of freedom: the freedom that 'really matter to us - freedoms from coercion, punishment, constraint, oppression' and what many understand to be the 'illusory freedom of the will' (Kane 2005: 4). It is around these two conceptions of freedom that the debate must turn. Yet, in Hume's work, freedom is relegated to a lesser important role as the definition of the nation and the nation's work is analysed in greater detail. In this sense, he provides a less realistic picture of freedom and disappoints as far as rendering an artistic and creative notion towards duty is concerned.
Equally, we can examine the free will debate through the lens of responsibility. 'Free will is also intimately related to notions of accountability, blameworthiness, and praiseworthiness for actions' (Kane 2005: 4). This constant focus on responsibility is what takes away from the basis of freedom and there is a need for Hume to regard this concept with a greater focus on history and events that have shaped the very conception of freedom.
We constantly question the amount of blame and praise that can be attributed to an agent on account of their actions. This is seen frequently in, for example, the criminal justice system. A ...
Cite this document
(“Free Will and Moral Responsibility Book Report/Review”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/philosophy/304088-free-will-and-moral-responsibility
(Free Will and Moral Responsibility Book Report/Review)
“Free Will and Moral Responsibility Book Report/Review”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/philosophy/304088-free-will-and-moral-responsibility.
From this paper, one can therefore come to a clearer understanding that free will touches on important issues in the philosophy of human nature, metaphysics, action theory, religion and ethics. It has been noted that there continues to be much deliberation from divergent opinions concerning nearly every facet of the free will theory.
They were also moved by their hopes and aspiration which could only be satisfied at the realization of their goal. So as to cement this cooperation they were governed by a set of rules to maintain the aim. The mission couldn’t be realized without actualizing their effort through work.
It shares the same overall goals as the rest of the health care system do, reducing premature death rate minimizing the effects of disease, disability, and injury. The social health protection provides quality health coverage and financial shield to all citizens of a given country.
Corporate social responsibility can be associated with the economics, social and environmental responsibility.The concept of corporate social responsibility generally involves the social organization and social bodies.Corporate citizenship and following the sustainability in a business are also regarded as the corporate social responsibility.
Soft determinism philosophers' view is that free will and moral responsibility can be combined with determinism. Libertarianists suppose that that all our actions, decisions and their results depend on us, they are result of rational agency, but not of chance or luck.
This paper will focus on the strategies used for justifying moral theories, as this is generally where the theorists go their separate ways in constructing the supreme principle of morality. As such each theory may yield different answers to the three questions raised under morality: 1) Authoritative question: Why ought I be moral 2) Substantive question: Which interest ought I to take favourable account of 3) Distributive question: Whose interest ought I to take favourable account of
The basic motive of this project is to analyze Michael Tooley’s article, “Moral Status of Cloning Humans”. He says that the idea or theory of genetic determinism is not correct, therefore, cloning to produce persons cannot be labeled intrinsically wrong. Tooley further asserts that not only is cloning not immoral, but it can help us improve our lives.
The mind of an individual continues to remain nationalized, notwithstanding one’s deep involvement and attachment to the concept of globalization. The author of “White Tiger,” Aravind Adiga draws inspiration from the plight of the Third World poor.