But when you have acknowledged this, what is becoming of the doctrine
of individual responsibility for crime? If a man has complete
free-will to sin or not, if crime be due to innate wickedness, how does
want of rain bring this on? And where is the common sense or common
justice in punishing him for what is really due to a defective climate?
He cannot control the rain. Manifestly then, as regards at least half
of these thieves, there was no innate desire to steal, because that
could not be affected by the famine. Had they desired to be thieves
they would have been so in any case. The truth is that they did not
desire to be thieves, but when the famine increased the temptation,
and, through physical weakness, decreased their power of resistance,
they fell. They sinned--not through spiritual desire of evil, but
through physical inability to resist temptation.
But if this is true of half, why not of the whole? There is no line of
demarcation. If true of some crime, why not of all? The doctrine of a
man's perfect free-will to sin or not to sin as he pleases is beginning
to look shaky. It will be as well to consider it.
What is free-will?
There is no necessity to discuss the meaning of "free"; we all know it;
there is nothing ambiguous about it; but with "will" it is different.
There are few words so incessantly misused as this word "will."
Philosophers are the worst offenders, and the general public but follow
their blind lead; yet unless you know exactly what you mean by it how
can you use it as a counter of your thought?
What does _will_ mean? "Where there's a will there's a way"--what does
this mean? Does it mean wish? If, for instance, you are poor and
stupid, can any quantity of wish make you rich? If you are weak will
it make you strong? If you have no ear will it make you a musician?
If you are a convict can it liberate you? That is absurd.
"Will," then means more than wish; to the desire must be added the
ability--actual or potential. That is evident, is it not? Without the
ability the wish avails nothing.
"Will," then, has two complements, both of which are necessary to it.
Its meaning is not simple but compound; never forget this; never
suppose that merely wishing with all your power can produce "will." It
cannot unless the ability be developed to aid it.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account