PHI 2010 – Introduction to PhilosophyFinal Exam Review*Hey guys, if you have another definition or answer to anything on the study guide where somebody already placed something, just add to it. The more information the better. To help organize our different answers and ideas, I suggest we just place numbers in front of our response to separate them, the more responses we have per questions and definitions the better, and if you disagree with anything just write next to it in parenthesis what information you find that is contrary to it and why you think it is wrong. Good luck, ThanksFree Will and Moral ResponsibilityBe able to define the following terms:Free will- (1) freedom to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or divine intervention(2) When we could have done otherwiseDeterminism- (1) philosophical idea that every event or state of affairs is the inevitable and necessary consequence of antecedent states of affairs(2) given the past, there is one and only one possible future(3) the doctrine that all events, including human action, are ultimately determined by causes external to the will. Basically= No free will Libertarianism- (1) states that humans are free from physical determinism and all the other diverse forms of determinism(2) the moral view that agents initially fully own themselves and have certain moral powers to acquire property rights in external thingsHard Determinism- (1) holds that determinism is true and is incompatible with free will; therefore, this view believes free will does not existSemi-compatibilism- (1) the idea that moral responsibility is compatible with determinismCompatibilism- (1) the idea that determinism is compatible with human freedom and that there must be a causal connection between our will and our actions. Freedom of will is different from freedom of action. We are “free” because we are not held in chains. However, this does not mean we have free will. (2) the idea an act can be free and still fall under the definition of determinism.Actions are caused by wants, desires, and decisions, hence it can be free and still an example of universal causal principle. (3) belief that free-will and determinism are compatible ideas, and that it is possible to believe both without being logically inconsistent.Incompatibilism- (1) determinism is incompatible with free will. Arguments include “we are billiard balls, puppets, windup toys”, “our only actual future is our only possible future”Immanent causation- (1) refers to an agent causing an eventTranseunt causation- (1) refers to an event causing an eventEfficient Cause -(1) type of cause that is origin of a change of state or rest of something Moral responsibility- (1) if an agent is morally responsible for her actions, then those actions can make her the appropriate target of certain attitudes (reactive attitudes) and practices. Theseattitudes include resentment, indignation, gratitude, approval; and the practices which the agent can be the appropriate target for include praise, blame, reward, punishment.(2) Agents can be causally responsible but not morally responsible under some circumstances. Examples include children or animals who can not be generally held responsible for their actions or objects of reactive attitudes.Reasons-responsiveness - (1) determines whether an agent is morally responsible or not. Reasons-responsiveness involves an agent making a connection between reason and taking action based on their belief or reason. Two kinds involve strong and weak reasons-responsiveness. Strong reasons-responsiveness requires agent must take the reasons to be sufficient, choose in accordance with the sufficient reason, and act in accordance with the choice. Weak reasons-responsiveness is a looser connection of reasons and actions.ChisholmHow does Chisholm characterize the problem of human freedom? Chisholm believes that human freedom conflicts with determinism because every act is caused by a previous act AND human freedom conflicts with indeterminism because the act is essentially not agent-caused but probabilistically caused. Why does Chisholm find the compatibilist version of “could have done otherwise” unsatisfactory? It is unsatisfactory because it is compatible with determinism, you could have done otherwise from a deterministic point of view but ultimately you did not. This view does not get you free will and therefore no moral responsibility. What type of causal power do humans need in order to be free? Be able to explain. Humans need immanent causation, that is an agent is causing the event simply because we willit, in order to be free. We must be like the un-moved mover.(2) They must not be caused by events, they must not occur by mere chance, they must not be uncaused.*Rather, the agent himself must cause them. What does it mean to say that other events incline but do not necessitate free actions? Past views or events may incline a person towards acting in a certain way but it does not necessarily dictate the outcome. This is a non-deterministic viewpoint. Van InwagenWhat is the Garden of the Forking paths account of free will? How is the this view of free will connected to the principle that ought implies can? (1) The Garden of Forking paths suggests that when a person acts of their own free will, they could have acted otherwise. The ability to have acted otherwise is underwritten by their ability to have chosen between alternative courses of action. More than one future is possible. ‘Ought implies can’ means that if an agent is morally obliged to perform an action, they must be capable of performing the action; however, they still have the freedom to not do so. They have the freedom to choose between different courses of action, regardless if it is morally right.How do compatibilists argue that future paths are open, even if they are not connected tothe present path?Van Inwagen brings up the subject of going back in time. If we were to go back in time, would the future play out exactly the same? Compatibilists would say yes, which suggests that that determinism exists. Compare this to rewinding a movie; the movie will not change. This suggests that future paths are connected to the past, so they must in fact be open. “A future is physically possible if everything that happens in it is permitted by the laws of nature. A future has a physically possible connection with the present if it could be ‘joined’ to the presentwithout any violation