Class Notes (1,100,000)
CA (650,000)
UTSG (50,000)
PHL (1,000)
Lecture 4

PHL201H1 Lecture Notes - Lecture 4: Immanence, Kleptomania, Compatibilism

Course Code
David Davies

This preview shows half of the first page. to view the full 3 pages of the document.
Lecture 4 Freedom and Determinism
Reductio ad Absurdum (Proof by Contraditiction)
P1. A is the case A B
P2. A entails an absurdity ~B
C1. Not A ~ A
- Want to know whether to believe A, if we show that A entails somethine we know
is false, then we know that A is false
Phenomenology The feeling of having free will
Moral Responsibility Freedom of will appears to be a precondition of moral
- If we don’t have control over our actions we cannot be blameworthy or
What is Free Will?
- Choosing to do/bring about an event ONLY if you could have chosen to do
otherwise (not chosen to do that event)
Necessary Condition A is necessary for B is having B requires having A
Ex. Need flour (A) to bake a cake (B)
- Can’t have B without A (BA)
Sufficient Condition A is sufficient for B if having B requires having enough for
having A
Ex. Having a cake (B) is sufficient for having had flour (A)
- If we don’t have B then we don’t have A (A B)
Free Will and Moral Responsibility
- Not morally responsible for what you couldn’t have done otherwise
- Are responsible for actions you could have done otherwise
- Having the ability to choose to not do an action is a necessary condition for being
morally responsible
- Being unable to prevent an action is a sufficient condition for not being morally
According to causal determinism?
- Every event has a cause
- Every event that is currently happening is due to past events that I couldn’t have
had control over
find more resources at
find more resources at
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version