Name: Professor: Course: Date: The Truth about the World The Link Between Political Freedom and Free Will As a political philosopher John Stuart Mill argues that there is only one reason to interfere with someone’s choices; if the behavior is detrimental to other individuals and society (Rachels and Rachels 230). Therefore Mill argues that one should be allowed to make personal choices as long as they do not have adverse effects on other people and the society. For example one has a right to use drugs as long as he does not affect other people under the influence of drugs. Mill emphasizes that competition of lifestyles and ideas allows individuals and societies to grow and develop which implies that the maximization of political liberty in the society is essential for the individual and societal development. While Pereboom opposes the notion by arguing that determinism is incompatible with free will actual meaning of life in a variety of ways. Others define life in a subjective way but others define it in an objective way. Taylor describes the actual meaning of life in a subjective way. He argues that individuals find happiness by doing their will no matter the challenges and struggles which make life meaningful. However Plato defines life in an objective way. He argues that people find life meaningful by doing what is significant in their lives. This forms the basis of the difference between Taylor’s and Plato’s argument. Additionally the concept of how the struggle is perceived in both Taylor’s and Plato’s argument also distinguishes their contentions. In regard the source of happiness one finds in life is what defines the truly meaning of life. Works Cited Rachels James and Stuart Rachels. The Truth About the World: Basic Readings in Philosophy. 3rd ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill 2005. Print. [...]
Final Examination Answer the first three questions. Each answer should be about 750 words. 1. John Stuart Mill says that he is not discussing "liberty of the will," but "civil or social liberty." What is the distinction he is making? Could someone like Pereboom who is a hard incompatibilist accept Mill's political views? Or would his stand in opposition to free will commit his to be opposed to Mill's political liberty? Would Stace's compatibilism require him to accept Mill's political views? Or could he favor free will, while opposing Mill's political liberty? In other words, are they two separate issues? Or does your position of free will influence your position on political freedom, and vice versa? 1. Descartes, Parfit, and Dennett raise the issue of whether "I," a unitary self that persists over time, exist. Descartes arrives at an Ego theory that Parfit and Dennett both reject. Explain how Descartes arrives at his concept of the self after initial skepticism. Explain how Parfit and Dennett criticize this Ego theory. Then explain why it is important to solve this problem, i.e., what the implications of accepting the Ego Theory or rejecting it are for how we live our lives and for our religious beliefs. Do the same for the Bundle Theory. Remember, the authors are offering arguments that are designed to convince their audiences of their positions. They are not just offering opinions. 2. Richard Taylor argues for a subjective criterion for the meaning of life; but Plato argues that “the unexamined life is not worth living,” which would seem to be an objective criterion for a meaningful life. Explain the differences between Plato and Taylor, including Plato’s argument for his criterion and Taylor’s reasons for his rejection of objective criteria like Plato’s. Remember, the authors are offering arguments that are designed to convince their audiences of their positions. They are not just offering opinions.