>>17818090
>so? the decision still happens in context of every thought and action, in the brain of an individual
There's no decision, unless you're willing to call an unconscious choice "free will" (which looses all meaning if you do so)
>so mysterious! I can't wait to hear your vision.
Human responsibility allows for assigning the possession of an act to the individual, but this does not necessarily entail real consequences. On the surface, responsibility would seem to imply some form of retribution within a moral system. If an individual were to act in a certain way, they should be punished or rewarded for their actions. However, this view is not at all incompatible with the declared goal of guiding behavior.
Indeed, if the individual is considered as the outcome of a series of events and influences, there still remains the reality of a causal chain that they symbolize. The serial killer may not be directly responsible for their actions in a deterministic view, but they still represent the logical culmination of destructive acts. Therefore, by considering the individual not as the author but as the work through which actions are realized, a process leading to the same results as moral responsibility can still take shape. The killer is still removed from society, and the thief is still rehabilitated to function within the community.
