Philosophy Test:

incompatibilism: the view that compatibism is false.

For all tense and purposes the world is deterministic.
if determinism is true, and it seems to be, everything that happens, has to
happen and everything you do makes in inevitable you make that choice.
it seems clear that under those circumstances, it isnt really possible for anyone to
be free.
incompatible: two statements are incmpatible if its impossible for both of them
to be simultaneously true.
Two statements are compatible i its possible for both of them to be
simultaneously true.
Compatlism:the view that freedom and determinism can co-exist, i,e. that it is
possible for people to be free in deterministic.

locke: an action is free if it is the result of a choice on the part of the agent (the
person who commits the action)

a corollary; one is free to the extent that ones actions result from one choices,
and one is unfree to the extent that ones actions do not so result

According to locke, freedom is being to do what you choose to do.

imporant point: one chooses to act, one doesnt chooses to choose

2. freedom is a property, not of choices, but of actions.
3. freedom is a relations between choice and action, not between subject and
choice.

since how things are, etermines how things will be...we are able to control and its
only because of that fact we are able to control. because we are connected to
our bodies, we are able to control.

lockes analysis is ok, locke has identified one important kind of freedom, bodily
freedom/freedom from external inhibitory facts etc.

But what about psychological freedom? what about "autonomy?" is all freedom
identical with the freedom to execute ones choices? (Locke doesnt consider this
question, but if he had, he would have said "no." or is there some other kind of
freedom? (frankfurt says "yes")

he agrees with what locke says, he thinks if you arent able to do the things
you wanna do, you are not free ex, if you are shackled to a wall.
franfurt says there is more to freedom than being restrained.
frankfurt beleives there is a sense that choice can be free or unfree.
if you are a amazing music composer, but he has an heroin addiction. but
what you really wanna do is compose music and you are really good at it,
however, you have this terrible addiction to heroin, but if you do you would
be out of order for a day or so.
you have a choice, compose music, or do heroin. one of those desires,
reflects what you believe to be of value, you dont believe heroin has value
but you want to do it.
frankfurt: in order for an action to be free, it must satify two ocnditions: (i)
it must be th result of a decision on the part of the agent (so to thi extent,
Frankfurt agrees with Locke); and (ii) the decision in question mst be in
alighment with what the agent really values and, more gnerally, who the
agent really is.

For frankfurt, freeactions have to be rooted in stable, coherent, enduring

psychological structures.

ego-dystonic vs ego-syntoc: for frankfurt, free action cannot be ego

dystonic.

ego-sytonic, they do identify with there symptoms.

according to franfurt, actions that result from ego- dystonic choices are not
free, in other words, if you dont indetify wiht the choice youre making, and
on which you are acting. than the ensugin act is not a freeone. the
compuoser/heroin user doesnt idenftu with what hes doing )when hes
shooting heroin); he sees it as a case of his identity being commandeered
or taken over by something alien to it. But that same person does identify
with what hes doing when he compses; he sees his actions (in that
context) as being onces of which he is the sole author and with which he
can fully identify.

Humanitarian intervention: the threast or use of force across state border

by a state or group of states aimed at preventing or eding widespread and
grave

the UN has 4 major situatinos inw hcih hunamtiarisn is warrned

1. ethnic cleaning
2. genocide
3. war crimes `
4. crimes against humanity

repobsbilty to protect R2P non bindining internation agreement by the UN

and its memebers, promoting humanitarian sageguards and prevention
-started as an honest effort
3 major aspects:
1.prevent
2. reaction to crimes against humanity
3. rebuild

just war theorys

- moral abhorrence towards war with a readiness to accetp that war may
sometimes be necessary
it has a just cause, waranted agression
comparative justics
lefitmate authority

mian differences betwew locke and frankfurt:

locke says if your doing what you wanna, than your free. freankfurt says
that your desires reflect in who you are. if your heart isnt in the decision
into what your doing, than your not really free. ex, if you are in a marriage
and you arent really happy in and you just go along with you, the idea is
that even if you choose to stay married than you arent really because your
heart isnt entirely in it.

determinism and incompatibism differences: determinism is that

everything is pre determined that everything that happens is a result of an
inevitable, incompabism is the idea that you cant have free will in a
determinisc world, there cannot be freedom in a determintic world.

catogorical imperative- is a rule that one ought ot follow under all

circumstances, ex one should not oblirate the univere
hypotheical- follow if you have a certain objects, so its objective that you
go to the gym etc..

if jerry is a bird, than jerry has feather, i the statement has if, than its a
hypotheical statements, its just not true.
the if part of a hypotheical statement, if jerry is a bird...is the antecdent
than jerry has feathers is the consequent.

emotivism: something is right or wrong is expressing your emotional

feeling about that thing, the consquence is that im not really saying
anything, im just expressing feelings. ethical statements are ways of
expressing emotions, so emotivist deny there are ethical truths, they thing
they are catagorically not true and not false, but they are not statements,
they are hollow. doctrine that ethical statemnts say nothing but do show or
express feelings.