Are we free when acting evil?

[!EEK]

This is my philosphy homework for in a month, could you guys help me?

In short, I would say "YES", because with our human nature, freedom is also tresspassing the other's freedom. I say that because freedom, according to me, is a word with intense sense in it..freedom means no rules, no hierarchy and everything is arbitrary.

And if you could write my introduction before tomorrow morning I'll make you child sacrifices )

(I am not lazy, I just want to share my toughts with you ^^)

[XxgoeyxX]

You know what to say already, we dont need to write an introduction for you. And yes you are being lazy. You have all of it down...just organize it.


And my opinion on this. Humans are clearly free to decide, but they are also held accountable for their actions by a moral law of cause and effect not unlike the law of karma in Indian philosophy. If im correct.

[ckBejug]

I think people are born both with the capabilities to do both evil and good. But we are more alligned to do evil. Look at children, for example, who haven't yet been very much exposed to the 'evil world'. You don't have to teach a child to steal or take another childs toys or candy. It is a lot harder for a parent to teach a child to do good than to do evil.

But do you think that a child knows instinctively what is inherantly good and inherantly evil at its most basest levels?

The flesh will always want to do what is contrary to the law of God. This is why we must exercise self control. So yes, we're very much free when acting evil. We are not bound by an unspoken law to act evil, we have free will and we choose to act evil.

[!EEK]

Thanks Bejug!
Very interesting ideas!

[Anonymouse]

Freedom is based on the notion of free-will, the right to self-ownership, and property, and the word we use most often is liberty. It is based on choice and in order to be free to do evil, we have to be free to do good, just like in order to differentiate between what is moral and immoral, we need the preceding ability of choice, for which without we would not be moral beings ( or immoral, accordingly ).

[HyeJinx1984]

This is my philosphy homework for in a month, could you guys help me?

In short, I would say "YES", because with our human nature, freedom is also tresspassing the other's freedom. I say that because freedom, according to me, is a word with intense sense in it..freedom means no rules, no hierarchy and everything is arbitrary.

And if you could write my introduction before tomorrow morning I'll make you child sacrifices )

(I am not lazy, I just want to share my toughts with you ^^)

well, first things first, ANY ceritified sociologist will tell you there is no such thing as "human nature."