If nobody has free will, can we blame anyone for what they're

I personally transcended reality, therefore I have free will

>>1454372
Go suck yourself off somewhere else

>>1454386
You are my property, you don't get to command me

File: 0294___QO6Cy9P.jpg (8KB, 180x180px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 180x180px

>>1454387
>you are my property
Spank me senpai

>>1454366
If free will does not exist, then no. Everybody is just a product of their environment. A machine running an algorithm. Can you blame a machine for doing as it is programmed to do?

to be blamed is part of my destiny

>>1454395
I will but only because I want to.

if nobody has free will, can you blame me for blaming others for what they're doing?

>>1454402
I always blame computers for freezing.

>>1454366
It's not about blame, it's about control

>>1454447
It's not the computers fault it's the programmers

>>1454454
my computer is sapient, malevolent and actively conspires to make my life worse

no amount of evidence can convince me otherwise

There wouldn't be blame per say but you could still have fault and error. When cars have air bags that fail they are removed until they are safe to exist in society, same would be same for individuals. A broken human would be on that does not function well within the whole they may not be necessarily "wrong" but would exist in conflict and thus in error. We would still have prisons and reconditioning but likely society would be more accepting of decommissioning the the irredeemable.

>>1454366
No, but we should still punish criminals and blame people for bad behavior, if only for pragmatic reasons. Philosophically, its debatable whether anyone can be objectively blamed for anything, but if we don't, it's obvious that shitty people will do more shitty things until the whole world just turns to shit.

Blame is a practical measure, not a moral one, and its a construct that is essential for any civilized society.

>>1454482

This. Furthermore, that principle determines WHICH things are worth assigning blame for. Namely, of whether assigning blame alters behavior or not.

Yes. Read Frankfurt on the principle of alternate possibilities, moral responsibility definitely still exists

File: 1441560932004.gif (851KB, 500x267px) Image search: [Google]

851KB, 500x267px

>>1454366
>can we blame anyone for what they're doing?
We don't really have a choice in the matter.

>>1454366
Yeah, the way I see it is that even though people don't technically have free will, for all intents and purposes they do. People might not be in control of their decisions, but they still make them, y'know?
They still consciously decide to do things, even if they're unwittingly following a script. They still bear responsibility for their choices.

We have to, because society wouldn't work if we don't.

>>1454685
I c etc

File: zi_yu_feng_shen_ji_by_karatenokami-d89yw3g.jpg (255KB, 1024x752px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 1024x752px

>>1454387
Avatar of existential realism here
You don't own anyone, no one is property for you to barter and trade. People are neither a commodity nor are you as ascended as you like to think. "Reality" as a concept is a spiritual deterrent that resets consistently to deflect people like you that would use "fantasy" to control the world.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Keys_to_the_Kingdom

>>1454366
Not really, no. That's why acceptance of the lack of free will leads to more compassion.

And no, it doesn't prevent you from locking criminals up.