FiltersDone

Question type

Essay

Multiple Choice

Short Answer

True False

Matching

Exam 53: Wt Stace: Compatibilism

Show Answer

Share

---

All types

Filters

Study FlashcardsPractice ExamLearn

Question 1

True/False

Review LaterAdd Note

Review Later

Stace (1886-1967) attempts to reconcile free will with causal determinism. He takes the position that William James labeled "soft determinism" (compatibilism). We must have free will to be held morally responsible, and yet it seems plausible that all our actions are caused. How can these two apparently inconsistent ideas be brought together? Stace argues that the problem is merely a verbal dispute and that, rightly understood, there is no inconsistency in holding to both doctrines. Free actions are those we do voluntarily, whereas unfree actions are those we do involuntarily. -Stace argues that free actions are those we do voluntarily, and unfree actions are those we do involuntarily.

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Question 2

True/False

Review LaterAdd Note

Review Later

Stace (1886-1967) attempts to reconcile free will with causal determinism. He takes the position that William James labeled "soft determinism" (compatibilism). We must have free will to be held morally responsible, and yet it seems plausible that all our actions are caused. How can these two apparently inconsistent ideas be brought together? Stace argues that the problem is merely a verbal dispute and that, rightly understood, there is no inconsistency in holding to both doctrines. Free actions are those we do voluntarily, whereas unfree actions are those we do involuntarily. -Stace maintains that punishment can be justified even if determinism is true.

Correct Answer

verified

True

Question 3

True/False

Review LaterAdd Note

Stace (1886-1967) attempts to reconcile free will with causal determinism. He takes the position that William James labeled "soft determinism" (compatibilism). We must have free will to be held morally responsible, and yet it seems plausible that all our actions are caused. How can these two apparently inconsistent ideas be brought together? Stace argues that the problem is merely a verbal dispute and that, rightly understood, there is no inconsistency in holding to both doctrines. Free actions are those we do voluntarily, whereas unfree actions are those we do involuntarily. -Stace rejects compatibilism.

Stace (1886-1967) attempts to reconcile free will with causal determinism. He takes the position that William James labeled "soft determinism" (compatibilism). We must have free will to be held morally responsible, and yet it seems plausible that all our actions are caused. How can these two apparently inconsistent ideas be brought together? Stace argues that the problem is merely a verbal dispute and that, rightly understood, there is no inconsistency in holding to both doctrines. Free actions are those we do voluntarily, whereas unfree actions are those we do involuntarily. -Stace believes that determinism is inconsistent with free will.

Stace (1886-1967) attempts to reconcile free will with causal determinism. He takes the position that William James labeled "soft determinism" (compatibilism) . We must have free will to be held morally responsible, and yet it seems plausible that all our actions are caused. How can these two apparently inconsistent ideas be brought together? Stace argues that the problem is merely a verbal dispute and that, rightly understood, there is no inconsistency in holding to both doctrines. Free actions are those we do voluntarily, whereas unfree actions are those we do involuntarily. -According to Stace, a definition is correct if

Stace (1886-1967) attempts to reconcile free will with causal determinism. He takes the position that William James labeled "soft determinism" (compatibilism) . We must have free will to be held morally responsible, and yet it seems plausible that all our actions are caused. How can these two apparently inconsistent ideas be brought together? Stace argues that the problem is merely a verbal dispute and that, rightly understood, there is no inconsistency in holding to both doctrines. Free actions are those we do voluntarily, whereas unfree actions are those we do involuntarily. -According to Stace, philosophers have assumed an incorrect definition of

Stace (1886-1967) attempts to reconcile free will with causal determinism. He takes the position that William James labeled "soft determinism" (compatibilism). We must have free will to be held morally responsible, and yet it seems plausible that all our actions are caused. How can these two apparently inconsistent ideas be brought together? Stace argues that the problem is merely a verbal dispute and that, rightly understood, there is no inconsistency in holding to both doctrines. Free actions are those we do voluntarily, whereas unfree actions are those we do involuntarily. -Stace thinks that in our most common understanding of free actions, we must say that no actions are free.

Stace (1886-1967) attempts to reconcile free will with causal determinism. He takes the position that William James labeled "soft determinism" (compatibilism). We must have free will to be held morally responsible, and yet it seems plausible that all our actions are caused. How can these two apparently inconsistent ideas be brought together? Stace argues that the problem is merely a verbal dispute and that, rightly understood, there is no inconsistency in holding to both doctrines. Free actions are those we do voluntarily, whereas unfree actions are those we do involuntarily. -Stace thinks that determinism rules out voluntary actions.

Stace (1886-1967) attempts to reconcile free will with causal determinism. He takes the position that William James labeled "soft determinism" (compatibilism). We must have free will to be held morally responsible, and yet it seems plausible that all our actions are caused. How can these two apparently inconsistent ideas be brought together? Stace argues that the problem is merely a verbal dispute and that, rightly understood, there is no inconsistency in holding to both doctrines. Free actions are those we do voluntarily, whereas unfree actions are those we do involuntarily. -Stace declares that moral responsibility requires determinism.

Stace (1886-1967) attempts to reconcile free will with causal determinism. He takes the position that William James labeled "soft determinism" (compatibilism). We must have free will to be held morally responsible, and yet it seems plausible that all our actions are caused. How can these two apparently inconsistent ideas be brought together? Stace argues that the problem is merely a verbal dispute and that, rightly understood, there is no inconsistency in holding to both doctrines. Free actions are those we do voluntarily, whereas unfree actions are those we do involuntarily. -Stace believes that free acts are rare.

Stace (1886-1967) attempts to reconcile free will with causal determinism. He takes the position that William James labeled "soft determinism" (compatibilism) . We must have free will to be held morally responsible, and yet it seems plausible that all our actions are caused. How can these two apparently inconsistent ideas be brought together? Stace argues that the problem is merely a verbal dispute and that, rightly understood, there is no inconsistency in holding to both doctrines. Free actions are those we do voluntarily, whereas unfree actions are those we do involuntarily. -According to Stace, the debate about free will is

Stace (1886-1967) attempts to reconcile free will with causal determinism. He takes the position that William James labeled "soft determinism" (compatibilism). We must have free will to be held morally responsible, and yet it seems plausible that all our actions are caused. How can these two apparently inconsistent ideas be brought together? Stace argues that the problem is merely a verbal dispute and that, rightly understood, there is no inconsistency in holding to both doctrines. Free actions are those we do voluntarily, whereas unfree actions are those we do involuntarily. -Stace says that the notion that determinism is incompatible with free will is an illusion.

Stace (1886-1967) attempts to reconcile free will with causal determinism. He takes the position that William James labeled "soft determinism" (compatibilism). We must have free will to be held morally responsible, and yet it seems plausible that all our actions are caused. How can these two apparently inconsistent ideas be brought together? Stace argues that the problem is merely a verbal dispute and that, rightly understood, there is no inconsistency in holding to both doctrines. Free actions are those we do voluntarily, whereas unfree actions are those we do involuntarily. -Stace argues that acts not freely done are those whose immediate causes are states of affairs external to the agent.