This is Philosophy Bites with me David Edmonds and me Nigel Warburton.

Philosophy Bites is unfunded. Please help us to keep it going by subscribing or donating at

W.W. Philosophy Bites.com. subscribing or

donating at W.W.

you can become a patron at Patreon.

If everything I do is the result of earlier causes,

is free will and illusion.

Determinists believe that all our action can be given a causal explanation.

A murderer's decision to wield an axe could be explained by a whole series of causes and

effects, including genetic causes,

environmental causes, neurons firing in the killer's brain and so on.

For a determinist, there doesn't need to be any room for real choice. So if I murder someone on that

view how can I be held morally responsible? How could anyone justify punishing anyone

else? Greg Caruso discusses this thorny problem.

Greg Caruso, welcome to Philosophy Bites.

Thank you very much for having me, David.

The topic we're discussing today is free will and punishment. Can you try and

encapsulate what the problem is? Yes, first let me say that I define free will in

terms of moral responsibility. So for me, what's really at stake,

the central philosophical and practical debate

is about whether we have a certain kind of control

and action that would be required for basic desert moral responsibility. praise and blame, punishment and reward. So

...