The unceremonious death of free will
In 1654, Thomas Hobbes, responding to Bishop Bramhall's orthodox ecclesiastical view of free will, namely the claim that we need free will lest we must cease to punish those whose acts are hateful to us, sent his treatise Of Liberty and Necessity to the Marquess of Newcastle, the moderator of t...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Review |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Spring 2024
|
| In: |
The American journal of psychology
Year: 2024, Volume: 137, Issue: 1, Pages: 93-97 |
| ISSN: | 1939-8298 |
| DOI: | 10.5406/19398298.137.1.12 |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | Verlag, lizenzpflichtig, Volltext: https://doi.org/10.5406/19398298.137.1.12 Verlag, lizenzpflichtig, Volltext: https://scholarlypublishingcollective.org/uip/ajp/article/137/1/93/391680/The-Unceremonious-Death-of-Free-Will 
|
| Author Notes: | Joachim I. Krueger, David J. Grüning |
| Summary: | In 1654, Thomas Hobbes, responding to Bishop Bramhall's orthodox ecclesiastical view of free will, namely the claim that we need free will lest we must cease to punish those whose acts are hateful to us, sent his treatise Of Liberty and Necessity to the Marquess of Newcastle, the moderator of this historic debate, ending his third paragraph with this pithy distillation, which both frames and settles the issue: “The question therefore is not whether a man be a free agent, that is to say, whether he can write or forbear, speak or be silent, according to his will, but whether the will to write and the will to forbear come upon him according to his will, or according to anything else in his power. I acknowledge this liberty, that I can do if I will; but to say that I can will if I will, I take to be an absurd speech” (Chappell, 1999, p. 16). |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | Online verfügbar: 01. April 2024 Gesehen am 10.06.2025 |
| Physical Description: | Online Resource |
| ISSN: | 1939-8298 |
| DOI: | 10.5406/19398298.137.1.12 |