• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do The Mentally Challenged Have Free Will??

Does Free Will Include the Mentally Challenged?

  • Yes

    Votes: 10 38.5%
  • No

    Votes: 3 11.5%
  • Unsure

    Votes: 6 23.1%
  • Who cares...

    Votes: 7 26.9%

  • Total voters
    26
No the south should not be not in my opinion. and I have no idea where you are but I still hold to my opinion

If you were going south it would not be capitilized but the South. It is a proper noun. C'mon IQ, I am not even an English teacher.

capitalized : regions or countries lying to the south of a specified or implied point of orientation; especially : the Southeastern part of the United States

South - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

...and hold your opinion to what? That I live in Arizona or the South? I don't even live in the USA and when I did it was in California and Oregon.
 
Making a choice and accepting you could have made the one not taken.

I presume by your definition that you believe no one has free will?

If taken literally, free will is making a choice independent of outside influences. That, of course, isn't possible. All decisions are made as a result of actions or events which influences said choice. That is not to say people are not responsible for making the choices they make. But it does explain bad decisions as well as the evil in this world. Morals are circumstantial. Anyone of us, if in specific circumstances, can and would commit unspeakable evil. Or even acts of heroism- but no decision is made free of outside influence.
 
If taken literally, free will is making a choice independent of outside influences. That, of course, isn't possible. All decisions are made as a result of actions or events which influences said choice. That is not to say people are not responsible for making the choices they make. But it does explain bad decisions as well as the evil in this world. Morals are circumstantial. Anyone of us, if in specific circumstances, can and would commit unspeakable evil. Or even acts of heroism- but no decision is made free of outside influence.

Interesting take. I was watching the Adjustment Bureau this morning and that was interesting as well...
 
If taken literally, free will is making a choice independent of outside influences. That, of course, isn't possible. All decisions are made as a result of actions or events which influences said choice. That is not to say people are not responsible for making the choices they make. But it does explain bad decisions as well as the evil in this world. Morals are circumstantial. Anyone of us, if in specific circumstances, can and would commit unspeakable evil. Or even acts of heroism- but no decision is made free of outside influence.

So there is no free will for anyone. You just said what I said, but your definition is different.

Shrug. I guess it's possible the physical laws of the universe dictate that all the atoms and molecules are destined to interact in a certain way and as a function of that, no matter what illusions we have, we're subject at the core to their activities.

It's a convincing position, but since the context of the thread is to question if the mentally challenged are somehow less able to exercise free will I don't think it advances anything.
 
So there is no free will for anyone. You just said what I said, but your definition is different.

I guess it's possible the physical laws of the universe dictate that all the atoms and molecules are destined to interact in a certain way and as a function of that, no matter what illusions we have, we're subject at the core to their activities.

I wouldn't hold to that exact position dogmatically, but are all things somehow interconnected? Definitely.
 
I wouldn't hold to that exact position dogmatically, but are all things somehow interconnected? Definitely.

Well do you use the definition of free will you gave or not? Only a disembodied psyche in a void could act without the influence of an outside agency. It's not a matter of dogmatism, you just ascribe to such a definition that would a priori negate the possibility of free will existing.
 
It must be an epidemic. You missed my point entirely. If you read my post entirely you might have gotten it but you didn't even read the blip you clipped it says DD people. DUH

I read your post. Apparently, you missed my point entirely.
 
I read your post. Apparently, you missed my point entirely.

Between the two of you I definetly have to side with you, Sig buddy... :lol:
 
I see The religious praying at churches and stuff after horrible events like this latest school shooting. They comfort themselves with the idea that "God has a plan". Well, God gave us free will... so the idea that there is a plan kinda makes sense, to a degree. What about the mentally challenged socio-paths that commit crimes like this. Manson, Bundy, this ****tard who killed the beautiful and innocent little children. Can they have free will? They can't, in my opinion. They are ****ed in the head. They can't make rational decisions AT ALL. They don't understand consequences. Many of them lack morals.

I just wonder because the idea of free will seems to get tossed out the window when it comes to these ****s... so, logically, that shoots a hole in the entire idea that there is ANY free will.

What say you?
They can have free will, as God has a plan for the sociopaths as well. That's why there is final judgement: to determine where each of us will end up for eternity.
 
Well do you use the definition of free will you gave or not? Only a disembodied psyche in a void could act without the influence of an outside agency. It's not a matter of dogmatism, you just ascribe to such a definition that would a priori negate the possibility of free will existing.

whichever decisions are based on influences beyond one's control are not the result of "free" will. That's my position.
 
They can have free will, as God has a plan for the sociopaths as well. That's why there is final judgement: to determine where each of us will end up for eternity.

They can... but at what mentally challenged point do the lose the capacity?
 
well then- it seems as if you have answered your own question.

Using your definition of free will. I originally stated that a choice may be more difficult to make based on external and internal circumstances beyond ones control. I still maintain that they have the ability to exercise free will in making the choice.

I just want you to state plainly whether your definition precludes anyone from having free will.
 
The mentally challenged, like children, should be encouraged to make choices, it is good for their mental development and emotional health. The choices should be kept simple and the choices should be chosen by adults, for instance, "do you want to get dressed before getting on the schoolbus?" is a choice that would not cause problems for most of us, but shouldn't be offered to a 2 year old or a mentally handicapped person, because they could cause serious disruption on the schoolbus if they choose "no". but "which do you prefer, your red shirt or your blue shirt"? is an okay choice that should be offered to them. caregivers should be careful not to get so deeply into the habit of making choices for the children and mentally handicapped, tat they shortchange the children and mentally handicapped by not letting them make the choices they can handle..
 
Back
Top Bottom