2 ms·

> Plenty of people may not have the same impulse control you have, and it's not their fault. If someone with bad impulse control kills another person, is it no

> Plenty of people may not have the same impulse control you have, and it's not their fault. If someone with bad impulse control kills another person, is it not their fault? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you. I'm just pointing out that this is the moral principle being debated here. I certainly don't know the answer, but we should think about this one a little bit before saying that no one is ever at "fault" for anything. Impulse control is just another facet of human personality, just like being aggressive, or being a bigot.

UnFleshedOne 7y ago
This boils down to [the incoherence of] free will. Same consequences too (mostly none) -- you still want to control antisocial behavior, regardless if you think people are wet robots running their unique blend of experience and wetware or if they are sock puppets possessed by magical souls unencumbered by earthly effects. Or anything in between and to the side. You still want to throw malfunctioning unit into a cell, or repair it some way. (Some soul-having scenarios are downright dystopian -- can't fix a defective soul unaffected by natural events, might have to dump it into a volcano).