Not Convinced Determinism Makes Sense of Moral Responsibility. Convince Me It Does

[MindForgedManacle]

I'm not sure libertarianism - assuming it's coherent - does. That's not to say I'm definitely a compatibilist or that it's without problems, but I do see it as plausible.

[Neo-Scholastic]

I'm not sure libertarianism - assuming it's coherent - does. That's not to say I'm definitely a compatibilist or that it's without problems, but I do see it as plausible.

I agree. Compatibly is entirely plausible. One thing I believe is relevant to free will is the idea of creativity. Very few choices are simple forks in the road or ordering from a menu. And even those are not so simple. You can choose neither path and go off-roading. You can flirt with the server instead of ordering. The capacity to invent new choices and create opportunities is part of what makes us human, the infinity within us.

[Whateverist]

One thing I believe is relevant to free will is the idea of creativity. Very few choices are simple forks in the road or ordering from a menu. And even those are not so simple. You can choose neither path and go off-roading. You can flirt with the server instead of ordering. The capacity to invent new choices and create opportunities is part of what makes us human, the infinity within us.

I have no problem with positing an 'infinity' within us, I just don't think we require a transpersonal entity to bequeath it to us. I don't see any need for an intermediary source to broadcast this infinity to our receiver either. I agree that any account which leaves out creativity is over simplifying the problem. If depth has arisen anywhere it might just as well come from/to us directly.

[Neo-Scholastic]

One thing I believe is relevant to free will is the idea of creativity. Very few choices are simple forks in the road or ordering from a menu. And even those are not so simple. You can choose neither path and go off-roading. You can flirt with the server instead of ordering. The capacity to invent new choices and create opportunities is part of what makes us human, the infinity within us.

I have no problem with positing an 'infinity' within us, I just don't think we require a transpersonal entity to bequeath it to us. I don't see any need for an intermediary source to broadcast this infinity to our receiver either. I agree that any account which leaves out creativity is over simplifying the problem. If depth has arisen anywhere it might just as well come from/to us directly.

That's very true. My response the OP was that fear of determinism is not a valid apologetic for God's existence. A strong advocate of free will like Sartre (atheist) would not see the need for a trans-personal entity, as you call it. And most Calvinists seem to advocate strong determinism.

[MindForgedManacle]

I agree. Compatibly is entirely plausible. One thing I believe is relevant to free will is the idea of creativity. Very few choices are simple forks in the road or ordering from a menu. And even those are not so simple. You can choose neither path and go off-roading. You can flirt with the server instead of ordering. The capacity to invent new choices and create opportunities is part of what makes us human, the infinity within us.

Well, I'm not entirely sure I agree here. After all, I doubt even libertarians think we actually choose what to believe or what to value, and certainly not directly. In other words, I don't think anything other than doxastic involuntarism is truly coherent and accurate. So I think a better description would be that what we choose will be based on our values and whims (which themselves are based on our values).