Irony of Moral Responsibility
In "Freedom and Resentment," Strawson argues that people are not morally responsible for their actions if they are not able to freely choose them. This is ironic because it suggests that people are not responsible for their actions even if they are the ones who committed them. This ironic twist challenges the traditional idea that people are morally responsible for their actions and highlights the complexity of the concept of free will. Strawson's argument suggests that people cannot be held accountable for their actions if they do not have the ability to choose them, which is a departure from the common belief that people are responsible for their actions regardless of their ability to freely choose them. This example of irony serves to challenge readers' assumptions about moral responsibility and encourage them to consider the role of free will in determining accountability.
Irony of Communication
In the essay "On Referring," Strawson argues that reference is necessary for communication to take place. This is ironic because it suggests that without the ability to refer to things, people would not be able to communicate at all. This ironic twist challenges the reader's assumptions about the role of language in communication and highlights the importance of reference in understanding and interpreting the world. Strawson's argument suggests that communication depends on the ability to refer to specific things or concepts, which is a departure from the common belief that language is sufficient for communication. This example of irony serves to challenge readers' assumptions about the role of language in communication and encourages them to consider the importance of reference in understanding and interpreting the world.
Irony of Personal Identity
In the essay "Persons," Strawson argues that personal identity is not a matter of what a person is, but rather a matter of what a person does. This is ironic because it suggests that people's actions are more important in defining their identity than their inherent characteristics or qualities. This ironic twist challenges the reader's assumptions about the role of personal characteristics in defining identity and highlights the importance of action and behavior in shaping who we are. Strawson's argument suggests that a person's actions and behaviors are more important in defining their identity than their inherent characteristics, which is a departure from the common belief that personality traits are central to defining identity. This example of irony serves to challenge readers' assumptions about the role of individual characteristics in defining identity and encourages them to consider the importance of action and behavior in shaping who we are.
