Responsibility And The Limits Of Evil Gary Watson Analysis

P.F. Strawson and Gary Watson’s “Responsibility and the Limits of Evil”

Gary Watson shares the true story of the serial killer Robert Harris in his essay “Responsibility and the Limits of Evil”. This inclusive narrative shares of a man who was once a very sensible young boy who found himself on the south tier of Death Row in San Quentin Prison. Through this story, the reader learns first about Robert Harris’s crime and then about his upbringing. Both of which are stories that one could consider hard to read and even consider to be a true story. Those who knew Robert Harris claimed that he was a man that did not care about life. He did not care about himself nor anyone else. Each inmate and deputy, from the prision, who was questioned about

P. F. Strawson was an English philosopher that fought strongly for the idea of compatibilism. Compatibilist see that libertarian free will and hard determinism are extremely different and there must be a compromise. Free will says that a human's actions are freely decided by the agent, while hard determinism argues that all past events will determine what is to come in the future. Compatibilism believe that in a mix of both libertarian free will and hard determinism. This is also known as soft determinism. The ideology of compatibilism says that both an action is determined, that is, that it must happen, but it can also be self-determined. But, where do we draw the line? What parts of our life are determined for us? What actions do we decide? These are all questions that come up for those who argue against

He states, “A person may well be morally responsible for what he has done even though he could not have done otherwise”. Frankfurt defends the idea that one must be morally responsible in some sense rather than just blaming the past, in a rather pessimistic manner. He also suggests that you are not responsible if you could not have avoided the situation and decision that you made. In Harris’s case, Frankfurt would say that Harris could be held responsible for his actions even though there is a possibility that Harris could not have acted otherwise. In P.F. Strawson’s essay “Freedom and Resentment”, he states, “This is that the notions of moral guilt, of blame, of moral responsibility are inherently confused and that we can see this to be so if we consider the consequences either of the truth of determinism or of its falsity” (72). Whether or not you one has the ability to control their actions, they still have the freedom to express feelings and emotions subsequent to their determined actions. We experience consequences in regards to our actions and most would even say morally