tommywallach Wrote:
Premise: When we know a lot about the events leading up to an action, we are justified in praising or blaming re: that action.
you misinterpreted the logic
premise:
in order to be justified in praising/blaming someone for X, we must know a lot about X's foundations
conclusion:
when we know a lot about X's foundations, we believe X was performed freely
assumption:
in order to be justified in praising/blaming, we must believe X was performed freely
(a) is wrong because it talks about someone's actions that were CAUSED by conditions beyond their control which is different than actions that are free or not free. either way, i don't see how the (a)'s terms regarding 'actions' apply to the argument's terms regarding 'actions'
(b) doesn't talk about the actions that lead up to something. it talks about information about the act in general
(d) is about 'how much we're inclined' while the argument isn't about this at all
(e) has the correct outcome/consequence but the inverse/incorrect condition