Incompatibilism, the view that free will and determinism are incompatible, subsists on two widely accepted, but deeply confused, theses concerning possibility and causation: (1) in a deterministic universe, one can never truthfully utter the sentence "I could have done otherwise," and (2) in such universes, one can never really take credit for having caused an event, since in fact all events have been predetermined by conditions during the universe's birth. Throughout the free will.

Socrates is one of the most important figures in the history of Western philosophy, but also one of the least known, since he wrote nothing himself, and is known to us only via the writings of others. This book examines the relation of these portrayals, especially Plato's, to the historical person, and also discusses the significance of Socrates' thought to the development of Western philosophy as we know it today.

Konrad Cramer, in “ Reflections on the Logical Structure of a Kantian Moral Argument ”, argues that the Universal Law Formulation of the Categorical Imperative is best understood as providing us with an indirect method for determining the moral permissibility of acting on our maxims. He then goes on argue, however, that no interpretation of UL is consistent with Kant’s epistemic claim that we can easily discover what morality demands of us. In response I argue that Cramer relies on an (...) excessively demanding interpretation of Kant’s epistemic claim and that his indirect interpretation of UL rests on a problematic account how our maxims relate to the actions that we perform on their basis. I then turn to the question of the overall plausibility of UL, and stress the need to interpret it within the context of Kant’s overall moral system. (shrink)

Incompatibilism, the view that free will and determinism are incompatible, subsists on two widely accepted, but deeply confused, theses concerning possibility and causation: (1) in a deterministic universe, one can never truthfully utter the sentence “I could have done otherwise,” and (2) in such universes, one can never really receive credit or blame for having caused an event, since in fact all events have been predetermined by conditions during the universe’s birth. Throughout the free will literature one finds variations on (...) these two themes, often intermixed in various ways. When Robert Nozick2 describes our longing for “originative value” he apparently has thesis (2) in mind, and thesis (1) may underlie his assertion that “we want it to be true that in that very same situation we could have done (significantly) otherwise.” John Austin, in a famous footnote, flirts with thesis (1). (shrink)

The question of concentration, or to use a word more in tune with the true nature of this essay, the heart, of this work is to explore the constructs surrounding the very nature and essence of the human heart. By heart I mean not the organ of flesh and blood, or the muscle that pumps life through out our corporal beings. But rather I mean to speak of an emotion that exists in parallel to the spirit or soul of the (...) human cognitive existence. I have chosen the title of this essay for a very specific reason, being that love and the human heart are two different concepts that I find to be closely related and essential for the other to exist. However, I findthat they are different and should be treated as such, for this reason I have given this essay a two-fold thesis. In that its main function will be to incorporate the idea of love with the ideologies of the human heart but also that they should be discussed separately. To most accurately address these points there will be three sections to this essay; the first will be an address on love and its meaning and purpose, the second will be in regards to the mystics of the heart, while the third will be a link between the two and act as a bridge from the psychological emotions of love to the physical and real emotions of man. (shrink)