Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

frnzprf t1_j8w5oy6 wrote

Reply to comment by InTheEndEntropyWins in Free Will Is Only an Illusion if You Are, Too by greghickey5

I agree that we should use words how they are used in daily life and not redefine them.

I think the judges shouldn't call that "free will" based on the usages of "free" and "will". Basically, I personally like the definition of libertarian free will better, because it's about a will that is free.

I'd call what the judge called "acting on free will", "acting based on your own will". If the judges definition is more common, it becomes the correct definition.

When it's hot in a room, then you don't have to fix the air-conditioning system, when there is a power failiure. The air-conditioniner wasn't "responsible". I think punishing criminals is like fixing or calibrating machines.

2

InTheEndEntropyWins t1_j8x6vq0 wrote

>I agree that we should use words how they are used in daily life and not redefine them.

That's my main argument. Most people have compatibilist intuitions in respect to free will. Most professional philosophers are outright compatibilists. Moral, court and justice systems are all based on compatibilist free will.

So yes, we should use the definition of what most people/society really mean by the word free will.

>[https://survey2020.philpeople.org/survey/results/all)

The only people redefining free will are the ones using libertarian free will, and incompatibilists.

1