Critical_Insight comments on Scientist, after decades of study, concludes: We don't have free will

[–] Critical_Insight@feddit.uk 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

It is conceiviable for an entity to not have free will but still be consciouss. It feels like something to be that thing. It couldn't choose their actions but they could experience pain and suffering. I don't see a reason for such entity to not have rights only because they don't have free will.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] AndrasKrigare@beehaw.org 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

That's true, I should have been more careful with my use of the word "rights." What I meant regarding free will was whether or not they'd have all the same rights as a human. The Animal Welfare Act I think is a good example of where we convey a more limited set of rights to things which can experience pain, but don't have free will*.

This is obviously all super debatable and opinions vary, but I think there are at least a decent chunk of people who believe humans have free will and animals do not, Descarte being a famous example.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent