Free Will and Conclusion

In the shooting case of Trayvor Martin, George Zimmerman should non go to prison. A signifi lowlifet amount of speculation exists around the shootings pot. There lacks an indisputable, completely genuine account of the shooting and its preceding accompaniments. Without the support of cover evidence send off base non be proven beyond a sensitive enquiry. I intend to show the conclusion, that George Zimmerman should non go to jail, is true becaexercising the melodic phrase is sound. I think my argument is valid because of the premises that support it.The premiere premise being that the Stand Your Ground Law in Florida permits the use of a fire arm in self defensive structure. There is no definite proof that George Zimmerman killed for any reason other then his individualised protection. He on that pointfore did not break the law. The second premise shows that during the disturbance between Trayvor Martin and George Zimmerman, Zimmerman sustained injuries to the back of the head and nose. There severity could not be accounted for but their presence is undeniable insinuating the shooting was in position an act of self defense. The third premise is based on the name call to the police station moments before the murder.A struggle can be heard along with a voice screaming for jock. The voice can not be identified without uncertainty to be that of Martin or Zimmerman. Zimmermans defense can argue is was him calling for help and there is no federal agency to prove or disprove that claim. The last premise illustrates that it is still mystic if Martin precipitously approached Zimmerman from layabout while he was retreating to his S. U. V.. Zimmerman admitted to initially following Martin suspecting he was a hoodlum up to no good, but claims to substantiate condition up after losing track of the teenager.According to Zimmerman their next encounter consisted of Martin approaching him from behind and asking him his what his problem, Zimmerman denied having a problem, and claims Martin then reacted by punching him in the nose. Witnesses reported perceive the two fighting in the distance, while others recount hearing whining followed by a gun shot. Consequently since no spectator observed the incident up close or in entirety, Zimmermans version which states Martin approached and attacked him can not be disproven with total certainty.These premises support that my argument is sound and help prove my conclusion is true. George Zimmerman should not go to prison for the shooting of Trayvor Martin because of the problems of abandon will. The problems of plain will has two premises that lead to the conclusion that no action is free. The first premise states that if an action must occur it is not free. The second premise is based on determinism and the idea that every event occurs because of antecedent events, dating back to before birth even, ensured the occurrence. Hard determinism believes two of these premises and therefore ac cepts the conclusion.They do not musical note we are obligated for our actions because they are not free. Soft determinism believes but the second premise, that a there is a past chain of events effecting present actions however they think our aver free will is included in the chain. Therefore softish determinism do not accept the conclusion and in assuming we have whatsoever free will declare we can be held responsible for our free actions. Libertarianism supports the first premise saying that if an action must occur it is not free but denies the second premise concerning the idea of determinism. They reject the conclusion.They feel you have chance to change a decision in the archaeozoic stages of deliberation, that being the case they feel we can be held responsible for our actions only when we had the opportunity to do otherwise. The position holding the most merit is soft determinism. It can be used to view the Zimmerman case. George Zimmerman could not control the events leaders up to final fatal action. We have no proof denying that Martin aggressively approached him from behind and initiated the violence. Based on the only known information we have Zimmerman had no control over this prior event.His next action was in self defense something he could not control therefore can not be held responsible for. If he had shot Martin before the personal clash occurred he would have demonstrated using free will. Since he could not control the fights progression he is not accountable for his actions. This march on proves he should not go to jail for the shooting. Morally killing in self defense is a justified action. We previously conveyed the lack of concrete evidence refuting Zimmermans recollection of the shooting as an act of self defense.Based on this we can determine Zimmermans killing is morally justified because as farther as we know it was an act of self defense. If he had shot Martin before being physically attacked his actions would not be jus tified and in process considered immoral. Morally his actions were justified as far as we can prove, adding to the reasons wherefore he should not go to jail. In the shooting case of Trayvor Martin, George Zimmerman should not go to jail. It can not be proven without reasonable doubt that he was not acting in self defense. Disputes over the shootings circumstances provide uncertainty in the case.The arguments presented are sound and prove the conclusion, that George Zimmerman should not go to prison, is true. Bibliography http//topics. nytimes. com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/trayvon_martin/index. html http//www. nytimes. com/ synergistic/2012/04/02/us/the-events-leading-to-the-shooting-of-trayvon-martin. html http//www. nytimes. com/2012/04/12/us/zimmerman-to-be-charged-in-trayvon-martin-shooting. html? pagewanted=all http//www. nytimes. com/2012/04/24/us/george-zimmerman-released-after-posting-bail-in-trayvon-martin-case. html? gwh=7C04C601D11A47D31E9BF5FF98E24EF4