Hobbes' Choice wrote:You can only be honest if you are determined to be honest. Rejecting determinism is dishonest.
There is a distinction between causality and metaphysical determinism. The notion that events have causes is not to say that the future is determined in every detail and respect. I find it interesting in view of modern science (particularly QM) that you should so dogmatically declare rejecting "determinism" to be dishonest.
In fact even if true determinism were true it could not be confirmed because the state of the entire universe at any instant in time could never be measured with the required degree of accuracy much less the future path of events calculated even by LaPlaces demon, so not only can determinism not be confirmed it would be a useless theory even if true. The notion that there is a certain degree of randomness and indeterminism inherent to nature is a common one even among physicists so I find your assertion both surprising and dogmatic.
"In philosophical discussion, the merest hint of dogmatic certainty as to finality of statement is an exhibition of folly." Alfred North Whitehead
Hobbes' Choice wrote:You can only be honest if you are determined to be honest. Rejecting determinism is dishonest.
There is a distinction between causality and metaphysical determinism. The notion that events have causes is not to say that the future is determined in every detail and respect. I find it interesting in view of modern science (particularly QM) that you should so dogmatically declare rejecting "determinism" to be dishonest.
In fact even if true determinism were true it could not be confirmed because the state of the entire universe at any instant in time could never be measured with the required degree of accuracy much less the future path of events calculated even by LaPlaces demon, so not only can determinism not be confirmed it would be a useless theory even if true. The notion that there is a certain degree of randomness and indeterminism inherent to nature is a common one even among physicists so I find your assertion both surprising and dogmatic.
"In philosophical discussion, the merest hint of dogmatic certainty as to finality of statement is an exhibition of folly." Alfred North Whitehead
I think you might be confusing determinism with fatalism.
Fatalism holds that the future is set in every detail and that no matter what you do, the future cannot change.
In determinism nothing is known of the future and humans are causal agents which change the outcome of causal chains.
Hobbes' Choice wrote:I think you might be confusing determinism with fatalism.
Fatalism holds that the future is set in every detail and that no matter what you do, the future cannot change.
In determinism nothing is known of the future and humans are causal agents which change the outcome of causal chains.
Hobbes' Choice wrote:I think you might be confusing determinism with fatalism.
Fatalism holds that the future is set in every detail and that no matter what you do, the future cannot change.
In determinism nothing is known of the future and humans are causal agents which change the outcome of causal chains.
Got a source for that say the SEP?
My source that you have got it wrong is the first line of your response to me.
In determinism, nothing is possible - rather, reality is a sequence of actualities.
Everyone understands that actions *have* consequences outside oneself - determinism is the recognition that one's own actions *are* consequences of things outside oneself.
Fatalism is more of an emotional tone or an attitude - which is certainly very much in agreement with determinism.
OuterLimits wrote:Determinism doesn't have any "agents".
In determinism, nothing is possible - rather, reality is a sequence of actualities.
Everyone understands that actions *have* consequences outside oneself - determinism is the recognition that one's own actions *are* consequences of things outside oneself.
Fatalism is more of an emotional tone or an attitude - which is certainly very much in agreement with determinism.
All causality is made of agents; poison, blood sunlight. a speeding bullet, an angry child.
Determinism is not simply the recognition that one's own actions are the consequence of things outside - that is ridiculously limiting and totally unimaginative.
A pork pie, a virus, a gene, a breath of air all are INSIDE. What your brain cells are doing are deterministic and all are INSIDE your body.
OuterLimits wrote:Determinism doesn't have any "agents".
In determinism, nothing is possible - rather, reality is a sequence of actualities.
Everyone understands that actions *have* consequences outside oneself - determinism is the recognition that one's own actions *are* consequences of things outside oneself.
Fatalism is more of an emotional tone or an attitude - which is certainly very much in agreement with determinism.
All causality is made of agents; poison, blood sunlight. a speeding bullet, an angry child.
Determinism is not simply the recognition that one's own actions are the consequence of things outside - that is ridiculously limiting and totally unimaginative.
A pork pie, a virus, a gene, a breath of air all are INSIDE. What your brain cells are doing are deterministic and all are INSIDE your body.
We think of ourselves as autonomous agents - *sources* of chains of cause and effect - "white holes" of causation.
But to take a broader deterministic view, your action is just a link in that cause and effect chain.
OuterLimits wrote:Determinism doesn't have any "agents".
In determinism, nothing is possible - rather, reality is a sequence of actualities.
Everyone understands that actions *have* consequences outside oneself - determinism is the recognition that one's own actions *are* consequences of things outside oneself.
Fatalism is more of an emotional tone or an attitude - which is certainly very much in agreement with determinism.
All causality is made of agents; poison, blood sunlight. a speeding bullet, an angry child.
Determinism is not simply the recognition that one's own actions are the consequence of things outside - that is ridiculously limiting and totally unimaginative.
A pork pie, a virus, a gene, a breath of air all are INSIDE. What your brain cells are doing are deterministic and all are INSIDE your body.
We think of ourselves as autonomous agents - *sources* of chains of cause and effect - "white holes" of causation.
But to take a broader deterministic view, your action is just a link in that cause and effect chain.
I appreciate the surrealism of your pork pie.
Then you accept that you misspoke : causality is within and without?
