Free Will, Moral Responsibility and Determinism

Which of the following best describes the core assumption of free will?

What is a key distinction between determinism and fate?

Which philosophical stance asserts that individuals can be morally responsible even if determinism is true?

What is the core belief of free will skeptics?

Which of the following is NOT a core tenet of determinism?

How does the 'interventionist response' challenge determinism?

What does the statement 'freedom is necessary for moral responsibility' imply?

What is a central tenet of incompatibilism?

What is the primary focus of consequentialism in the context of the free will debate?

How does consequentialism approach the concept of moral desert?

What is the main point of Frankfurt's counter-example regarding moral responsibility?

Given the principle of determinism, what could potentially be achieved if we were able to perfectly calculate the effect of every cause?

Which concept suggests that our responses to stimuli are not predetermined by a linear path of effect?

How does the inability to definitively prove or disprove free will impact our understanding of it?

In the context of moral responsibility, what critical question arises regarding the relationship between freedom and determinism?

In Frankfurt's example, how does the presence of a hypothetical intervener (e.g., Black, the neurosurgeon) affect Gunmar's moral responsibility?

If future events are predetermined, and the past is fixed by recall, how might time be conceptualized according to determinism?

How might a consequentialist society approach an individual who is predicted to commit a crime years in the future?

What central question do the cases of the brain-injured man and individuals with tumors who developed pedophilia introduce to the free will debate?

What is one perspective on determinism and moral responsibility?

How might one interpret the implications of quantum mechanics (which introduces unpredictability at the subatomic level) for the free will debate?

Consider a scenario where a person commits a benevolent act but was subtly influenced by subliminal messaging. How might different philosophical stances (Libertarianism, Compatibilism, Free Will Skepticism) evaluate the person's moral responsibility?

Imagine a future where technology can accurately predict a person's likelihood of committing a crime. If a person is predicted to have a very high chance of committing a crime, what action would a society that strictly adheres to libertarianism take?

A supercomputer has successfully modeled every particle in the universe and determined that your decision to read this question was predetermined since the beginning of time. How does the 'personal thought - free of limitation' perspective challenge the implication of determinism in this scenario?

Given the arguments about free will, determinism, and moral responsibility, which statement encapsulates the most nuanced understanding of their interplay?

Define 'free will' as it is generally assumed in philosophical discussions.

What is the relationship between conscious decisions and moral responsibility?

Explain the core tenet of determinism.

How does the concept of 'alternative possibilities' relate to determinism?

Why does unpredictability or randomness not equate to free will?

Briefly describe the 'Interventionist Response' to determinism.

How does the text differentiate Determinism from Fate?

Explain why the problem of free will is considered 'merely postponed'.

State the core belief of Libertarianism regarding free will and moral responsibility.

Contrast Libertarianism with Free Will Skepticism.

What is the central claim of Compatibilism in the free will debate?

According to Consequentialism, what primarily determines whether an action is morally right?

Explain the Consequentialist view of the necessity of free will for moral responsibility.

Describe the hypothetical scenario involving Gunmar and Ridley, and explain its purpose in Frankfurt's argument.

What is the Incompatibilist response to Frankfurt’s argument about moral responsibility in cases where someone couldn't do otherwise?

In the context of moral responsibility, how might the reasoning behind an action influence its perception, even if the outcome remains the same?

Explain the author's personal thought about the relationship between our inability to prove free will and the existence of freedom itself.

Critically analyze the dilemma that if determinism is true, we are not responsible for our actions, but if our actions are merely random, we are also not responsible for our actions. What underlying assumption does this dilemma make about responsibility?

Consider a society that adopts a strict Consequentialist approach to justice. Describe a potential ethical concern that might arise from this approach, even if it consistently leads to seemingly beneficial outcomes.

Explain how Frankfurt's argument challenges the traditional incompatibilist view that moral responsibility requires the ability to have done otherwise. What specific aspect of his hypothetical examples allows him to make this challenge?

Consider a deterministic universe where every event is causally determined, and advanced technology allows us to predict future events with certainty. If a person commits a crime that was predicted years in advance, how would a hard determinist, a compatibilist, and a consequentialist each argue for or against holding that person morally responsible?

Detail the incident of a man suffering an object through his brain, and the transformation of his behaviour afterwards.

In the context of determinism and the possibility of predicting the future, what implications does the text suggest regarding time and the potential for time travel?

Given Frankfurt's example with Becky and John, elaborate on the key point of the example, and how it may contradict with Consequentialism.

Someone robs a bank with a gun to pay for her mother's cancer treatment, and she gets away with being undetected. Detail how a Consequentialist would react to this situation.