<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Secret Politics of the Compatibilist Criminal Law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2009/09/03/the-secret-politics-of-the-compatibilist-criminal-law/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2009/09/03/the-secret-politics-of-the-compatibilist-criminal-law/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 19:48:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: jorgipogi</title>
		<link>http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2009/09/03/the-secret-politics-of-the-compatibilist-criminal-law/#comment-15446</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jorgipogi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2009 16:58:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/?p=8191#comment-15446</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think he read the Communist Manifesto.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think he read the Communist Manifesto.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zorka</title>
		<link>http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2009/09/03/the-secret-politics-of-the-compatibilist-criminal-law/#comment-15445</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Zorka]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2009 08:43:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/?p=8191#comment-15445</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I know mening of &quot;get your life back on track&quot;
Zorka]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know mening of &#8220;get your life back on track&#8221;<br />
Zorka</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2009/09/03/the-secret-politics-of-the-compatibilist-criminal-law/#comment-15438</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[John]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2009 14:55:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/?p=8191#comment-15438</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What a great article! My sense, as an aspiring situation-sensitive compatibilist is that it&#039;s true that compatibilism does tend to be used in support of status quo bias.  But it&#039;s also true that there&#039;s no conceptual requirement that it do so. A good compatibilism would recognize that free-will is something that we can have more or less of,  that it is often a moral, cognitive,  and conative achievement to grow the sphere of freedom for oneself or for others, and that despite ones best efforts, situational factors will always circumscribe, and may completely overwhelm individual responsibility for any given belief or behavior.  

Furthermore, I&#039;d argue that improving compatibilism is our ONLY realistic path to a better situation-sensitive politics.  The alternative of denying free-will undermines the justifications for political action.  Why try to expand freedom if that&#039;s not possible?  How do you hold accountable those at the top (who often have relatively great control over the situations of themselves and others) if you lack the conceptual means to hold anyone accountable for anything?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What a great article! My sense, as an aspiring situation-sensitive compatibilist is that it&#8217;s true that compatibilism does tend to be used in support of status quo bias.  But it&#8217;s also true that there&#8217;s no conceptual requirement that it do so. A good compatibilism would recognize that free-will is something that we can have more or less of,  that it is often a moral, cognitive,  and conative achievement to grow the sphere of freedom for oneself or for others, and that despite ones best efforts, situational factors will always circumscribe, and may completely overwhelm individual responsibility for any given belief or behavior.  </p>
<p>Furthermore, I&#8217;d argue that improving compatibilism is our ONLY realistic path to a better situation-sensitive politics.  The alternative of denying free-will undermines the justifications for political action.  Why try to expand freedom if that&#8217;s not possible?  How do you hold accountable those at the top (who often have relatively great control over the situations of themselves and others) if you lack the conceptual means to hold anyone accountable for anything?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
