RE: Do Humans Have Compulsary Will? Which best describes your take on 'will'?
May 28, 2015 at 8:29 pm
(This post was last modified: May 28, 2015 at 8:49 pm by bennyboy.)
(May 28, 2015 at 7:02 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Accuracy in the scientific sense. I'm primarily concerned with explaining metaphysical details with naturalistic explanations.
The thing with naturalistic explanations is that they can only point to causes of various levels of proximity, but can never point to ultimate causes. For example, if you ask why I have a mind, it's simple enough to say that it's a byproduct of the brain. If I disbelieve you, you can smack me in the head in a baseball bat, and it will be clear that my mind is no longer functioning. But that's like saying "If I pull away this magnet, the magnetic field isn't there anymore. Therefore the reason magnetic fields exist is that's what magnets do." That's true, but it's no really the right kind of answer.
It seems to me that all naturalistic explanations have a simple ontology-- they end at a statement of brute fact. But "The Big Bang diddit" isn't really much more satisfying than "Goddidit," in my opinion.