(October 15, 2015 at 2:21 pm)Evie Wrote: Although you do do that with crocodiles, I don't think that was his point. There's another version where he uses a bear as an example instead. By the way I am understating, of course that wasn't his point. His point was that free will is not just a delusion but a potentially harmful one.
His point seemed to be that we ought to regard the situations similarly, as not involving whatever it is he means by "free will." That in both cases, the things acted as they did due to preceding causes. But if we regard them the same, shouldn't we treat the cases the same?
If we are not to treat the cases the same, then, presumably, this is for some reason, and not some crazy arbitrary distinction. The thing is, he does not give us any reason not to treat them the same.
There is either an important difference in the two cases, or they should be handled similarly. He has suggested that there isn't an important difference in the two cases. The consequences of that seem problematic in a way he does not consider in his speech.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
