(March 26, 2012 at 1:43 am)genkaus Wrote: Now, let's consider your arguments here.
"If the choice is certain, you must defend it was freely made between alternatives." - True that. The choice was made free from coercion and it was still certain.
"If there is only one choice that can be made, it is determined" - True that too. But as long as it is you who did the determining and there was no coercion involved - free-will is not contradicted.
Your position has always been a fundamentally contradictory one, here you claim the choice is both free from coercion, but certain and inevitable.
I would avoid using the phrase "you did the determining" because the causes of this determination are empirically traceable, although fundamentally nigh-impossible to fully comprehend. Your "determining" is "determined" by natural causes, and therefore coerced into a certain decision.
It is coerced, and there is no alternatives, it is not free will. You really want to call it free will, but it really does contradict the definition you agreed as true.
Sadly, as we concluded earlier, our discussion cannot overcome this contradiction.
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
