RE: Questions for "Our Role(s) as Christians on Atheist Forums"
May 15, 2018 at 11:13 pm
(This post was last modified: May 15, 2018 at 11:15 pm by Edwardo Piet.)
(May 15, 2018 at 9:46 am)SteveII Wrote:(May 14, 2018 at 6:56 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Wrong. That's compatibilist free will. Libertarian free will is essentially uncaused choice, which is why it's incoherent.
Given that you've redefined libertarian free will as compatibilist free will, it makes it all the funnier when you later say:
Fine, I will clarify. However, libertarian free will is not "essentially uncaused choice." It is that the cause is internal mental processes that are themselves not physically determined.
Libertarian free will demands more than that: It demands that the universe be both indeterministic and the beings that live in it are able to determine themselves (a contradiction). It both dismisses causes and asks for a special pleading for self-causes in the case of humans (or any beings with a supposed soul). And yet even if the special-pleading were granted it would still be impossible because it would demand us to be self-causing which is completely incoherent.
As Galen Strawson has said, "I'll give you an immaterial soul. I'll give you indeterminism. It does not matter."
This is why libertarian free will is fundamentally impossible in any possible universe:
"You do what you do, in any given situation, because of the way you are.
To be ultimately responsible for what you do, you have to be ultimately responsible for the way you are—at least in certain crucial mental respects.
But you cannot be ultimately responsible for the way you are in any respect at all.
So you cannot be ultimately responsible for what you do." - Galen Strawson
(May 15, 2018 at 2:59 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:(May 15, 2018 at 1:49 pm)SteveII Wrote: I would only add libertarian free will requires holding to a mind/body dualism: mental processes are not simply the result of chemical/electrical processes in the brain.
I'm with you in spirit. I just think the mind/body problem has multiple options consistent with Christian doctrine (not taking into account Calvinist predestination). I do not reject substance dualism outright; I just find hylomorphism more promising. So personally, I wouldn't marry the doctrine of free will to substance dualism since I believe there are other equally valid options. That could be a discussion for another day.
All forms of mind/body dualism make no sense. The problem with dualism is twofold: (1) It posits two kinds of fundamental stuff for no good reason. (2) It gives absolutely no explanation for how they can interact with each other and still in any meaningful way be considered two different fundamental kinds of stuff.
