Do we have to act morally to be free?

[elman]

I suggest you tell that to Kant.

We have to be able to make a choice in order to make a choice. That´s deep.

How do you see an action being moral if there is no choice? In such an event what is meant by moral? Is it referring to a characteristic of the actor or of the determining factor of the action?

 

[cantata]

What value is there in the word moral or in using the word if there is no opportunity or possibility of being immoral?

Whoever said there's no opportunity or possibility of being immoral?

The perfectly rational being would act perfectly morally. We are quite capable of acting immorally.

 

[elman]

Whoever said there's no opportunity or possibility of being immoral?

The perfectly rational being would act perfectly morally. We are quite capable of acting immorally.

Ability to act morally or immorally is free will.

 

[quatona]

How do you see an action being moral if there is no choice?

I don´t. I haven´t claimed I did.

In such an event what is meant by moral?

I don´t know. You would have to ask those who use the term "moral" for such an action.

Is it referring to a characteristic of the actor or of the determining factor of the action?

I don´t know. I am the wrong person to ask these questions.

 

[DoubtingThomas29]

Kant thinks that you have to act morally to be free.

If you do not act morally, you are led by your desires, over which you have no control. You are subject to determinism; you desire several things, and your strongest desire is what guides your action.

Kant argues that it is only when you behave morally that you overcome determinism; you may act contrary to your desires in order to act as you ought.

Is there merit to Kant's view?

I believe in fate, I feel that we are determined to do what we are to do, simplyby our upbringing, and evolutionary, creation of our brains. Our genes, playa big role into, if we have a good temperment, or a bad one, it probably plays right into, how well we respond to the upbringing given to us by our parents. So we are the product of our environment.

Even if you are simply following a moral code, which is what everyone should do, you still are operating within like thought control boundaries. Where your thinking is under control, by your moral code, and also, just tempermant too. Control yourself or you will be controlled, that is rule number one.

I wonder what Kant meant by being free? We still are under some control even if it is from our own moral code, to keep us from breaking the law quite frankly.

I mean you are free if you are not in jail, free to starve or to work hard, our choice!

 

[elman]

I believe in fate, I feel that we are determined to do what we are to do, simplyby our upbringing, and evolutionary, creation of our brains. Our genes, playa big role into, if we have a good temperment, or a bad one, it probably plays right into, how well we respond to the upbringing given to us by our parents. So we are the product of our environment.

Even if you are simply following a moral code, which is what everyone should do, you still are operating within like thought control boundaries. Where your thinking is under control, by your moral code, and also, just tempermant too. Control yourself or you will be controlled, that is rule number one.

I wonder what Kant meant by being free? We still are under some control even if it is from our own moral code, to keep us from breaking the law quite frankly.

I mean you are free if you are not in jail, free to starve or to work hard, our choice!

You are free to be kind to others or to be unkind and this is not controled by your dna or your environment. I did not say it was not effected by your dna and environment. I said you still have some wiggle room, and you are responsible for how you wiggle.

 

[DoubtingThomas29]

That Sounds about right to me that we have some elbow room. I hope to read the book Elbow Room by Daniel Dennett some time.