--- joanna <123hop at comcast.net> wrote:
> Is there a name for the position that we are
> responsible even though we
> are not free?
>
> Because that comes a lot closer to describing
> reality.
>
> Magnificent insight though. He had a lot of those.
>
> Joanna
>
> Miles Jackson wrote:
>
> >The discussion of Nietzsche encouraged me to pull
> out Twilight of the
> >Idols again. Here's a great passage on the concept
> of free will:
> >
> >***************
> >
> >The error of free will. Today we no longer have any
> tolerance for the
> >idea of "free will": we see it only too clearly for
> what it really is —
> >the foulest of all theological fictions, intended
> to make mankind
> >"responsible" in a religious sense — that is,
> dependent upon priests.
> >Here I simply analyze the psychological assumptions
> behind any attempt
> >at "making responsible."
> >
> >Whenever responsibility is assigned, it is usually
> so that judgment and
> >punishment may follow. Becoming has been deprived
> of its innocence when
> >any acting-the-way-you-did is traced back to will,
> to motives, to
> >responsible choices: the doctrine of the will has
> been invented
> >essentially to justify punishment through the
> pretext of assigning
> >guilt. All primitive psychology, the psychology of
> will, arises from the
> >fact that its interpreters, the priests at the head
> of ancient
> >communities, wanted to create for themselves the
> right to punish — or
> >wanted to create this right for their God. Men were
> considered "free"
> >only so that they might be considered guilty —
> could be judged and
> >punished: consequently, every act had to be
> considered as willed, and
> >the origin of every act had to be considered as
> lying within the
> >consciousness (and thus the most fundamental
> psychological deception was
> >made the principle of psychology itself).
> >
> >***************
> >
> >Whenever people talk about "agency" or "personal
> responsibility" on LBO
> >I think about Nietzsche's argument above: the
> notion of free will is
> >nothing more than a useful fiction that justifies
> power relations. In
> >my view, the usefulness of Fred for leftists,
> despite Fred's own dubious
> >political beliefs, is pretty obvious here.
> >
> >Miles
> >___________________________________
>
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> >
> >
> >
>
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
____________________________________________________________________________________ Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7