I don't know if free will is real or not. It certainly feels real, but I also understand the arguments against it-- although I believe quantum physics' uncertainty provides a place for free will to hide.
Scott Adams has repeatedly said he doesn't believe in free will, but he believes "we" have to pretend it's real so "we" can punish criminals and maintain civilization. Why? That is only necessary if you imagine that revenge ("punishment") is necessary for justice, and it isn't. Government-supremacism can cloud your thinking as badly as any other mental problem.
Self-defense and restitution don't depend on why someone does something, only that they did. Their action created a debt; justice requires this debt to be paid (or payment to be attempted).
If you have no free will to avoid archating, it's the same as your having no free will to choose to fall upward into the clouds. There are still consequences. You've still become part of a chain of events, one of which could be restitution or death at the hands of your intended victim. The lack of free will doesn't change this.
If you do have free will and you used it to choose to archate, you chose to create a debt. Even if you pretend you didn't choose this debt, your actions created it. Again, free will is irrelevant to the outcome.
-
Thank you for helping support KentForLiberty.com
Get a Time's Up flag or two