I fully enjoy Daniel Dennett's view but if I were a determinist I would be incompatabilist. Whereas he is a compatabilist.
I'm not sure if I support determinism or indeterminism though, but either way I disbelieve in free will. So I am what is known as a hard incompatabilist or "pessimist" on the matter. Of course, I am certainly not a fatalist though. If I was I wouldn't be able to appreciate Dennett's arguments on the matter of "evitability" and the like.
Even cause and effect isn't proven and Quantum Mechanics has been shown to be quite "indeterministic", although if we had an even deeper understanding of it (since no one is really capable of grasping it on an intuitive level, it is only the maths that can be truly done) it may be more deterministic than we think perhaps. So I really don't know whether to subscribe to determinism or indeterminism, but I see "Free Will" as equally hopeless in either position.
I would be a compatabilist but I don't see what Dennett describes as "Free will" to be the will that is free. I see freedom of the agent, some people are more free than others, some are under duress and some are not... but the "Will" itself, I never see how it can be in any way, free. In fact, I don't see how the "Will" could even exist if it wasn't constrained. The will has to be unfree so it can be the controller of our body (and other parts of our brain).... some of us as agents being on the whole more "free" than others. The will can't be free otherwise it wouldn't be able to "will" us because it would be independent.
From Wiki: "[...]Some philosophers' views are difficult to categorize as either compatibilist or incompatibilist, hard determinist or libertarian. John Locke, for example, denied that the phrase "free will" made any sense (compare with theological noncognitivism, a similar stance on the existence of God). He also took the view that the truth of determinism was irrelevant. He believed that the defining feature of voluntary behavior was that individuals have the ability to postpone a decision long enough to reflect or deliberate upon the consequences of a choice: "...the will in truth, signifies nothing but a power, or ability, to prefer or choose".
"You can do what you will, but in any given moment of your life you can will only one definite thing and absolutely nothing other than that one thing." - Arthur Schopenhauer
I'm not sure if I support determinism or indeterminism though, but either way I disbelieve in free will. So I am what is known as a hard incompatabilist or "pessimist" on the matter. Of course, I am certainly not a fatalist though. If I was I wouldn't be able to appreciate Dennett's arguments on the matter of "evitability" and the like.
Even cause and effect isn't proven and Quantum Mechanics has been shown to be quite "indeterministic", although if we had an even deeper understanding of it (since no one is really capable of grasping it on an intuitive level, it is only the maths that can be truly done) it may be more deterministic than we think perhaps. So I really don't know whether to subscribe to determinism or indeterminism, but I see "Free Will" as equally hopeless in either position.
I would be a compatabilist but I don't see what Dennett describes as "Free will" to be the will that is free. I see freedom of the agent, some people are more free than others, some are under duress and some are not... but the "Will" itself, I never see how it can be in any way, free. In fact, I don't see how the "Will" could even exist if it wasn't constrained. The will has to be unfree so it can be the controller of our body (and other parts of our brain).... some of us as agents being on the whole more "free" than others. The will can't be free otherwise it wouldn't be able to "will" us because it would be independent.
From Wiki: "[...]Some philosophers' views are difficult to categorize as either compatibilist or incompatibilist, hard determinist or libertarian. John Locke, for example, denied that the phrase "free will" made any sense (compare with theological noncognitivism, a similar stance on the existence of God). He also took the view that the truth of determinism was irrelevant. He believed that the defining feature of voluntary behavior was that individuals have the ability to postpone a decision long enough to reflect or deliberate upon the consequences of a choice: "...the will in truth, signifies nothing but a power, or ability, to prefer or choose".
"You can do what you will, but in any given moment of your life you can will only one definite thing and absolutely nothing other than that one thing." - Arthur Schopenhauer
