RE: Hypothetically, science proves free will isn't real
July 11, 2016 at 11:41 pm
(This post was last modified: July 11, 2016 at 11:42 pm by Ignorant.)
(July 8, 2016 at 2:43 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: "Do you accept my definition that determinism is the belief that "in any given moment there is exactly one physically possible future".
No. I understand that this is how the debate is usually framed. Hopefully my previous posts have shown that I find this definition inadequate. In addition, it imports the concept of necessity into the concept of determinism, and I find that unhelpful and often misleading in a discussion trying to get at the actual reality.
Quote:So do you believe free will is compatible with determinism or not?
Well, I thought that was obvious that I have concluded that, under certain conditions, people are able to freely determine some of their own actions. As determinations of action, these are clearly 'compatible' with a causal history in which each moment successively determines the next moment.
If it isn't obvious yet, I reject a lot of the vocabulary of the typical compatibilism discussion as well as the limited concepts by which it progresses. If you insist that I use your terms and reduce the concepts of freedom, human action, determination, deliberation, will, and causality to fit your categories, we won't get very far.
Do you really just want to try to fit my position into one of your compatibilism/incompatibilism categories? Or would you rather try to understand a different perspective?
