If free will was not real

[Cato]

Free will debates are so frustrating. The fucking philosophers rarely degree on definition and the boundaries of application. My opinion is that if determinists are correct, something I doubt can ever be proven or definitively disproved, our species is still reconciled to navigating our existence as if we had free will. So in the end it really doesn't make a fuck.

It does make a fuck and the simple fact that philosophers debate it doesn't mean it isn't an already won debate. Free will is an incomprehensible idea that simply isn't compatible with reality, like a round triangle, if you will.

It makes a fuck for a lot of reasons. A person who thinks they are "free" to do everything is a very different one from one that aknowledges that they are 100% a product of their environment and genes, and that there's no place in-between for something essentially independent of the two. It's a matter of how you see certain things because of this change of perspective, as well as happening to be the difference between a false view and a correct one.

Your comment on the matter is so utterly simplistic, I'm sorry to say it tells me a lot about you as a person. Your attitude becomes sort of pathetic in light of the utterly mediocre stupidity displayed here.

Have a fine day and no hard feelings, mkay.

Your ad hominems and unsupported bromides did nothing to refute my concluding observation. Anyone that seriously scratches the surface of this debate would would never fence post the conversation with 'do anything' and '100% genes and environment'. And you have the audacity to describe my understanding as simplistic. You're not even wrong here. 

Again, since you glossed over it in order to have a go with me, even if determinism were proven it would have no practical effect since we would all still be compelled to engage existence as if we were 'actually' making choices between possible courses of action. That was my plainly spoken point which you never addressed.