Although the concept of free will is essential to that of moral responsibility, Conclusion its role in determining responsibility is not the same in all situations. ββ ββββ βββββββββ βββββββ βββββββββββ βββ βββ ββββββ ββββ ββββββ ββββββββ ββββ ββββ ββββββ βββββ βββββ βββββββββββ βββ ββ ββ βββ ββββ βββββββ βββ βββ β βββββ ββββββ βββββ βββββββ βββββββ βββββββββββ βββ βββ ββββββ βββββββ ββ ββββ ββββ ββββ ββ ββββ ββββ ββββββ ββ βββββββ ββββ βββ βββββ ββββββ βββββ ββββ ββββ βββββββββ ββ ββββββ βββββββββ βββββ βββ ββββ βββββ ββββββ ββ ββββ ββ ββββ βββββββ
The author claims that free will does not always have the same role in determining moral responsibility. The argument proceeds with two examples which support this claim by demonstrating situations where free will leads to different assessments of responsibility. First: the free choice to commit crimes leads to responsibility. Second: the free choice to eat a diet that causes a heart attack does not lead to responsibility for the consequences of having a heart attack while driving.
The claim that a choice of diet can affect whether or not one has a heart attack helps to support the conclusion by demonstrating a situation where responsibility and free will have a different relationship from that associated with crime.
Analysis by AlexandraNash
The claim that a choice ββ ββββ βββ ββββββ βββββββ ββ βββ βββ βββ β βββββ ββββββ βββββ βββββ βββ ββ βββ βββββββββ βββββ ββ βββ βββββββββ
It is a ββββββββββ ββββββββββ ββ βββ βββββββββ
It is used ββ ββββ ββββ ββ ββββββ ββββ βββββββ βββββββ βββββββββββ βββ βββββββ ββββββ ββ ββββββ β βββββ ββββββ βββββ ββββββββ
It is cited ββ ββββββββ ββββ βββ βββββββ ββ βββββ ββββββββββββββ ββββββ ββ βββ ββββ ββ βββ βββββββββββ
It is used ββ ββββββββ βββ βββββ ββββ ββ ββββββ βββ ββββ βββββββββ βββββββ βββββββββββ βββ ββββββββ
It is used ββ βββββββ ββ βββ ββββββββββ ββ βββ βββββββββ