RE: Do you believe in free will?
March 13, 2012 at 11:27 am
(This post was last modified: March 13, 2012 at 11:32 am by NoMoreFaith.)
(March 13, 2012 at 11:02 am)whateverist Wrote: Anyone who thinks the ultimate outcome is absolutely predestined down to the last detail has got a faith based belief, not a reasoned position. Unless it was inevitable that I write these exact words in response to the last several posts which you gentlemen too were compelled to write just as you did. (Bullshit.)
Holy Non-Sequitor Batman!
Its no different to saying the weather system is predestined, or more accurately subject to cause and effect in such complexity that prediction is extremely difficult despite the best attempts of meteorologists.
Meteorology is not considered a faith, so why consider determinism as such?
That assertion confuses me.
From my point of view, the assertion that there is a 3rd agent for change in the universe beyond the previous state, and the fundamental laws which change one state to another is more hocus pocus than determinism, but I'm sure its just a relativity of views.
So, sure, its inevitable, the inevitable conclusion to the first moments of the universe, to the creation of galaxies and our planet, the abiogenesis leading to life, to the evolution of intelligence, the creation of language, to reason, the firing of neurons upon specific natural causes in a long line of causation.
Also, in order to be a belief I have to assert it without reason, and ALL I've done is stated reasons, not assertions. You mistake arguments for the position of determinism in the same vein of theism, which is inaccurate. I don't claim to be definitely right, I simply put forward my reasons for my position, and in the absence of deconstructing any errors in that position, I cannot change my mind as of yet. But I can, and will if I an issue is presented which causes my hypothesis to be demonstrably incorrect. Scientific Method ftw.
I agree, and stated earlier however, that the concept of free will borders on the unfalsifiable (I'm not convinced its true, but very possibly), however I will commit the fallacy of burden of proof, freely, and admittedly, that free will requires evidence that the fundamental laws of the universe are not absolute and the course of causation can be changed through a medium disconnected with your biology.
I don't call it faith, and I don't see how you can, simply an opinion on the hows and whys the world work, where science is unlikely to be able to penetrate. In which case, all philosophy is faith, and equally dismissible and I think philosophers around the world would have great issue with that
Thankfully I have the get out of jail free card in that I am not a trained philosopher
Self-authenticating private evidence is useless, because it is indistinguishable from the illusion of it. ― Kel, Kelosophy Blog
If you’re going to watch tele, you should watch Scooby Doo. That show was so cool because every time there’s a church with a ghoul, or a ghost in a school. They looked beneath the mask and what was inside?
The f**king janitor or the dude who runs the waterslide. Throughout history every mystery. Ever solved has turned out to be. Not Magic. ― Tim Minchin, Storm
If you’re going to watch tele, you should watch Scooby Doo. That show was so cool because every time there’s a church with a ghoul, or a ghost in a school. They looked beneath the mask and what was inside?
The f**king janitor or the dude who runs the waterslide. Throughout history every mystery. Ever solved has turned out to be. Not Magic. ― Tim Minchin, Storm
