You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
S
STT
Guest
So a person has four possible types of action to do what is objectively good or bad:
*]free will good
*]free will bad
*]unfree will good
*]unfree will bad
Without free will one is not responsible (culpable) for the objective good or bad.
This we have already discussed. Will can choose bad or follow intellect to do good.
V
Vico
Guest
And also one can do good or bad unwillingly.This we have already discussed. Will can choose bad or follow intellect to do good.
An example from the Catechism of the Catholic Church is:
1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.
S
STT
Guest
You are a rational being therefore you only do good unwillingly.And also one can do good or bad unwillingly.
An example from the Catechism of the Catholic Church is:
1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.
V
Vico
Guest
An act can be objectively good or bad without the person being culpable for it. You seem to be using good and bad as subjective terms.You are a rational being therefore you only do good unwillingly.
S
STT
Guest
No, what I am saying is that a well programmed computer can be rational too. Here is a simple script: “If this then do this”. A computer doesn’t need free will to perform logical process as we don’t need free will to perform rational act.An act can be objectively good or bad without the person being culpable for it. You seem to be using good and bad as subjective terms.
R
rinnie
Guest
Not always. Sometimes people can be put in the position that they do not have free will, which seems to be the position you seem to be always putting God in, which is false.This we have already discussed. Will can choose bad or follow intellect to do good.
Just because God did give us free will, does not mean the sin of humans cannot take that free will away. The problem here is you seem to be trying to put God in the position post after post of putting God in the position of humans.
S
STT
Guest
That is always true for a agent who has free will. Rationality always allows us to perform correct act. Free will opens a door to do bad. That is all.Not always. Sometimes people can be put in the position that they do not have free will, which seems to be the position you seem to be always putting God in, which is false.
Sin cannot take away free will if will is a faculty of soul. Moreover we could live a life without sin if there is no free will. Why should we bother then?Just because God did give us free will, does not mean the sin of humans cannot take that free will away. The problem here is you seem to be trying to put God in the position post after post of putting God in the position of humans.
W
Wesrock
Guest
I wouldn’t call the completion of an algorithm a rational act. Any rationality exists within the mind comprehending the process.No, what I am saying is that a well programmed computer can be rational too. Here is a simple script: “If this then do this”. A computer doesn’t need free will to perform logical process as we don’t need free will to perform rational act.
V
Vico
Guest
We also do not need free will to perform an irrational act, and computers are programmed to be irrational sometimes.No, what I am saying is that a well programmed computer can be rational too. Here is a simple script: “If this then do this”. A computer doesn’t need free will to perform logical process as we don’t need free will to perform rational act.
Merriam Webster, irrational: 1b. not governed by or according to reason
S
STT
Guest
That really doesn’t matter that computer doesn’t comprehend what it is doing, at least within the subject of this topic. What is important to notice is that a rational being does not need free will to perform a rational act.I wouldn’t call the completion of an algorithm a rational act. Any rationality exists within the mind comprehending the process.
S
STT
Guest
Whatever a computer does is based on logic.We also do not need free will to perform an irrational act, and computers are programmed to be irrational sometimes.
Merriam Webster, irrational: 1b. not governed by or according to reason
W
Wesrock
Guest
But it’s devoid of any content. Meaning and content is only relevant to the mind observing it.Whatever a computer does is based on logic.
S
STT
Guest
That is true. I brought the example of computer up to show that a computer also can perform logical task without free will. We don’t need free will to perform a rational act instead when we want to do a bad act.But it’s devoid of any content. Meaning and content is only relevant to the mind observing it.
V
Vico
Guest
The do what they are programmed to do, but the programs are sometimes flawed. This is because the small instructions are followed to achieve the goal of the programmer which may be flawed, therefore irrational.Whatever a computer does is based on logic.
S
STT
Guest
Computer always works based on logic even if there is a bug in the program.The do what they are programmed to do, but the programs are sometimes flawed. This is because the small instructions are followed to achieve the goal of the programmer which may be flawed, therefore irrational.
V
Vico
Guest
Even though the machine instructions are sequential and mathematical and various tests jump to various locations predictably, the results of a program written using them are not necessarily rational as in agreeable to reason.Computer always works based on logic even if there is a bug in the program.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.