2007-10-31 06:32:21 · 6 answers · asked by Kelly 3 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
If you mean "idiot" in the psychological connotation of someone lacking an IQ high enough to be functional, don't worry. They are always under supervision.
But to lawfully define someone's ideas as "idiocy" is to make the bureaucracy decide--for example--that those who believe in time travel are idiots. Or that those lunies who protest soldier's funerals are unfit to have freedom of speech.
That is not only unConstitutional, but anti-human rights. Do you want someone deciding that YOU are an idiot? They could do that if they wanted to.
2007-11-01 00:47:16 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You don't let someone have "free will" as it wouldn't be free anymore and would be considered "deterministic". Your question is flawed and a simple fix could be, "Is it morally correct to let idiots have freedom?"
2007-11-03 18:18:35 · answer #2 · answered by Uno 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, idiots may have free will but I don't think they know what to do with the freedom. They probably will end up doing stupid things that is not good for others.
2007-10-31 19:04:05 · answer #3 · answered by curiouscrew 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
who are you to judge whos an idiot? you would have to really know a person to deem if they are an idiot or not. and even if they are they still have free will whether you like it or not.
2007-10-31 17:09:58 · answer #4 · answered by . 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They already have free will. It comes from God. All other things being equal, they have as much right to it as anyone else.
2007-10-31 19:27:00 · answer #5 · answered by kcchaplain 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The question is moot, because it's not your choice. They do.
2007-10-31 15:05:38 · answer #6 · answered by zilmag 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋