Determinism

[Caecilian]

---

Causal determinism is what it says it is. Its the doctrine that all phenomena are caused. In a Newtonian universe this would imply that the future is pre-determined (that there is only one future).

In both cases, 'one possible future' is incorrect, [...]

(my bolding)

What is the difference between the two boldings here? Because in the above bolding it seems that you agree with me that casual determinism means/implies that there is only one possible future. Whereas with the second bolding you seem to then contradict yourself and disagree with me.

Unless, I presume you mean that determinism itself is found to be incorrect by quantum mechanics and yet the definition (and the one I also use) of "only one possible future" is still correct?

To get more pedantic, you say that determinism ="that there is only one future", well what's the difference between that and "that there is only one possible future"? If it's the only, the one, possibility then that is the future so it's the same thing right? So I presume you agree with my definition (and I've only been arguing for the definition of determinism I've never argued for the truth of it - although I'd hope you realized that ).

---

The first point that you bolded refers to the conditions in which 'one possible future' is correct. The second point draws attention to the fact that in 2 different interpretations of QM 'one possible future is false', despite one of those interpretations being deterministic.

To reiterate, there is only one possible future if:

1. Causal determinism is true

and

2. The many worlds interpretation of QM is false.

The point here is that causal determinism and 'one possible future' are separable. What the many worlds interpretation demonstrates is that its possible to have causal determinism and more than one future.