@ rabbit:
Yeah, that looks okay. The bolded bit is important- I don't think it was in your original (admittedly brief) argument. Dualism (and therefore soul/ other supernatural stuff) doesn't require libertarian free will, but libertarian free will does require the supernatural junk.
What religions claim independent souls, but aren't metaphysically dualistic (or idealistic)? You have me stumped there. Surely independent agency of souls requires dualism of some sort. I also don't follow your point about the problems of contracausal free will and libertarian free will being the same. Perhaps it would help if you said exactly what you mean by contracausal free will. I've been assuming that the term included indeterminate will, i.e. the actions that you will ultimately supervening on a stochastic microphysics, but its quite possible that you don't mean that at all.
I'd go somewhat further than you re. the problem of supernatural causation. As far as I'm concerned, the whole notion is incoherent. Theres a nice argument in one of Jaegwon Kim's books- 'Physicalism, or Something Near Enough'- that strongly indicates that this is the case. If you're interested, I'd be happy to run through it- its yet another strong philosophical argument against the theist position, so worth having in ones armoury.
Tend to agree with you on that one. Natural/ supernatural is good.
Quote:If reality (no matter whether it's the natural or the alleged supernatural component of it) is such that it does not allow contracausal free will, there is no room for a soul natural or supernatural that is uncaused.Bold added
Yeah, that looks okay. The bolded bit is important- I don't think it was in your original (admittedly brief) argument. Dualism (and therefore soul/ other supernatural stuff) doesn't require libertarian free will, but libertarian free will does require the supernatural junk.
Quote:Dualism as the dichotomy of natural and supernatural stuff is a troublesome concept for other reasons. For if the two are separate, how can they influence each other? I do contend that religious concepts that claim dualism have an additional problem. But even religions that don't claim duality and do claim independent ageny of souls have the problem I sketched above. So in fact the problem of contracausal free will in our reality is precisely the same as libertarian free will in our reality.
What religions claim independent souls, but aren't metaphysically dualistic (or idealistic)? You have me stumped there. Surely independent agency of souls requires dualism of some sort. I also don't follow your point about the problems of contracausal free will and libertarian free will being the same. Perhaps it would help if you said exactly what you mean by contracausal free will. I've been assuming that the term included indeterminate will, i.e. the actions that you will ultimately supervening on a stochastic microphysics, but its quite possible that you don't mean that at all.
I'd go somewhat further than you re. the problem of supernatural causation. As far as I'm concerned, the whole notion is incoherent. Theres a nice argument in one of Jaegwon Kim's books- 'Physicalism, or Something Near Enough'- that strongly indicates that this is the case. If you're interested, I'd be happy to run through it- its yet another strong philosophical argument against the theist position, so worth having in ones armoury.
Quote:NB: I prefer natural vs supernatural because there indeed are things in the natural world (such as information and concepts) that are part of the natural world.
Tend to agree with you on that one. Natural/ supernatural is good.
He who desires to worship God must harbor no childish illusions about the matter but bravely renounce his liberty and humanity.
Mikhail Bakunin
A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything
Friedrich Nietzsche
Mikhail Bakunin
A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything
Friedrich Nietzsche
