Conventionality (leaving aside that this begs the question how conventionality is obtained) stipulates that justice demands responsibility for one’s actions. Without Free Will, the concept of justice is irrelevant, nonexistent even (as is the concept of responsibility). Not so much as a subject to be brought up, or an issue to be raised.
Taking, for a moment, the other side of this controversy, we may observe that many of the most desolately miserable cultures on this earth deny the remotest possibility of Free Will, yet impose unbelievably savage punishments on individuals for actions they are helpless to avoid. Somewhat more comprehensible is the level of sympathy for criminality displayed by those elements of Western Civilization who have chosen to substitute a theology of ‘Science’ for the Judeo-Christian Tradition so long prevalent in Western Civilization. It’s inhumane, after all, to condemn people for actions they cannot avoid committing. Yet, this standard is not applied uniformly. Conservatives are condemned for their beliefs far in excess to the moral condemnation heaped upon criminals for their actions (one is tempted to think that Conservatives would be herded into concentration camps if it were not for it being a step too far to be attempted at present).
I wish that I possessed more sophistication in Science and Philosophy than I do, but I appreciate your willingness to include me just the same. I can attest from my own experience to the human misery produced by the denial of justice, as can, I think, we all.
And spirited irish, allow me to thank you for your post #122. One of the more illuminating expositions I’ve had the privilege of viewing in quite some time.
Thank you so very much for your insights, dear YHAOS!
So very true, dear YHAOS! Indeed as you say neither justice nor personal responsibility has any meaning absent Free Will. (Yet it seems cruel and irrational to impose a punishment on someone who was powerless to choose to do other than what he did.) Which may account for the fact that irresponsible and unjust people like to dispose of Free Will by simply calling it an illusion — just another "ghost in the machine." It has no basis in Darwin's theory [see essay at the top]. So it must be a fiction.
The history of Justice in the West goes back to ancient Greece, and quite likely further back to antecedents in Egypt and the Middle East. The Greeks called it Dike — meaning not only Justice, but order, law, right. Moreoever it seems the Greeks also believed in the divine judgment of souls on the basis of personal responsibility. [See The Pamphyllian Myth, "The Myth of Er," in Plato's Republic.]
Until quite recently, Justice has been understood as the universal moral order of the world, physical and human. As David Fideler has written:
The simple fact remains that the scales of justice are inexorable — it is a principle of Nature, and not merely of human morals, that each should receive its due. If we poison our rivers, we poison ourselves; if we act in stupidity, it is only appropriate that we suffer the consequences. If there is a moral to the story it is simply that individuals and societies are far less likely to run into trouble should they possess an awareness of these principles and relationships. —The Pythagorean Sourcebook and Library, by Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie, 1987, p. 45The constructors of Second Realties know the best way to destroy First Reality is to deny its foundation in truth and justice, and to convince us that Free Will does not exist....
'Tis a tad depressing....
Thank you ever so much for writing, dear YHAOS!