RE: morality is subjective and people don't have free will
May 17, 2017 at 2:12 pm
(This post was last modified: May 17, 2017 at 2:14 pm by Catholic_Lady.)
(May 17, 2017 at 1:46 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote:Catholic_Lady Wrote:So how can you justify being angry at the person who rapes, kills, steals, lies, cheats, is conservative, is religious, likes Trump, IS Trump, etc etc? Am I missing something?
I don't think I'm really in the categories you're addressing, and sorry if this has already been dealt with, but how is a person without free will supposed to act any other way?
I just figured if an individual has the knowledge that someone had 0 choice over what they did, she/he wouldn't feel angry at the person for having done it.
But Aroura already explained that while the anger does happen regardless, she acknowledges that the anger is not rational or justified.
(May 17, 2017 at 1:48 pm)mh.brewer Wrote:(May 17, 2017 at 12:20 pm)Aroura Wrote:
Factors in your control does not mean you freely chose them. Just that you control them. Control =/= choice.
My alternative, control does not always equal choice. Sometimes it does, especially if there are multiple choices. You get to freely choose between them. Or you can choose with in the parameters of the factor(s). I will never believe that I don't have free will. I do believe that my free will is often limited, either in choices or application.
This is my stance as well. Free will does not mean all choices are always available to everyone. But it does mean someone has the option to choose between those that are.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh
