compatibilism

[promethean75]

"The complete irresponsibility of man for his actions and his nature is the bitterest drop which BigMike, who understands, must swallow." - F. Nietzsche

[BigMike]

It would be very encouraging if this group of people could acknowledge what they may consider to be harsh realities, namely that we are all insignificant specks in an enormous physical universe, and then ask how we should proceed. How should ideas from the old world, such as moral responsibility, blame, praise, freedom of speech, and many others, be reevaluated and redefined so that the entire world can benefit, while remaining true to the facts? If humanity is able to survive into the future, I believe this will be our greatest challenge to overcome.

[iambiguous]

I ask libertarians and compatibilists: Which of the four existing forces is involved in executing your free will? This question is clear, fair, factual, and crucial to the discussion at hand. So please do not seek refuge in a confusing labyrinth of consciousness gobbledygook.

Click.

See, there he goes again...

Posing this to the libertarians as the libertarians themselves might pose it. As though he was actually free to opt to ask them his question as he chooses, and they are actually free to opt to answer it as they choose.

When, as some determinists insist, he and they and all that he and they think, feel, say and do is unfolding in the only possible reality.

That, in other words, even though they are compelled to answer his question only as they must, they are still guilty of "seeking refuge" if they don't concur with him.

Only, yeah, I'm the first to admit that going back to a definitive understanding of existence itself, he may well be closer to the whole truth here than I am.

Just answer the question, please.

Absolutely shameless!!!

[BigMike]

Click.

See, there he goes again...

Posing this to the libertarians as the libertarians themselves might pose it. As though he was actually free to opt to ask them his question as he chooses, and they are actually free to opt to answer it as they choose.

When, as some determinists insist, he and they and all that he and they think, feel, say and do is unfolding in the only possible reality.

That, in other words, even though they are compelled to answer his question only as they must, they are still guilty of "seeking refuge" if they don't concur with him.

Only, yeah, I'm the first to admit that going back to a definitive understanding of existence itself, he may well be closer to the whole truth here than I am.

Just answer the question, please.

Absolutely shameless!!!

No response is required. It is glaringly obvious that you have nothing to offer.

[iambiguous]

These idiots will almost certainly proceed in the same manner as before, pretending as though they are taking part in a meaningful conversation while continuing to wander aimlessly in circles. It is so ridiculous that words fail me. And so sad. Really sad.

iambiguous to Nature:

You explain it to him.

[iambiguous]

Just answer the question, please.

Absolutely shameless!!!

No response is required. It is glaringly obvious that you have nothing to offer.

How utterly blind determinists of his ilk can be.

To, for example...

THEIR OWN ARGUMENTS!

[BigMike]

"First, they ignore you," Nicholas Klein, an American labor union advocate and attorney, warned in 1914. "Then they ridicule you. And then they attack you and want to burn you. And then they build monuments to you."

[promethean75]

A BigMike monument would be kinda cool.

[iambiguous]

"First, they ignore you," Nicholas Klein, an American labor union advocate and attorney, warned in 1914. "Then they ridicule you. And then they attack you and want to burn you. And then they build monuments to you."

Or...

"First, they are compelled by the laws of matter to ignore you. Then they are compelled by the laws of matter to ridicule you. And then they are compelled by the laws of matter to attack you and want to burn you. And then they are compelled by the laws of matter to build monuments to you."

And, I suspect, BM will be in complete agreement.

[bahman]

Just answer the question.

None. But the reality is not merely matter that apparently, physicists do not know what matter is. To understand reality one has to accept the existence of mind and qualia otherwise one faces all sorts of confusion such as compatibilism. That is true that matter does follow the laws of nature but the reality is not merely matter. We witness our freedom so free will must be real.

There is thus no force. Consequently, the neural signals in your brain have nothing to do with your free will. This includes the nerves from the motor cortex, which are responsible for muscle contraction and body movement. Specifically, the fact that momentum is always conserved proves that your free will is completely ineffective, powerless, useless, and pointless.

Have you, as a biological agent, ever experienced options?

[BigMike]

"First, they ignore you," Nicholas Klein, an American labor union advocate and attorney, warned in 1914. "Then they ridicule you. And then they attack you and want to burn you. And then they build monuments to you."

Or...

"First, they are compelled by the laws of matter to ignore you. Then they are compelled by the laws of matter to ridicule you. And then they are compelled by the laws of matter to attack you and want to burn you. And then they are compelled by the laws of matter to build monuments to you."

And, I suspect, BM will be in complete agreement.

If this is the case, it's a tragic situation. Clearly, one would have hoped that at least some of you were intelligent enough to recognize when the parts fit together logically and make sense. Unfortunately, reality does not always conform to our desires. I have faith that subsequent generations will be less brainwashed and more intellectually honest than the current one.

[promethean75]

"Have you, as a biological agent, ever experienced options?"

i believe i may have an angle for helping you out here, bahman. don't think of options as two equally possible outcomes that an agent chooses from because whatever happens was going to happen, meaning there was no alternative... no options.

instead 'options' are imagined outcomes that we hold when we are in that peculiar libetean state of experiencing the decision to stand up before we do so... which is actually backwards in reality.

so in that case what you thought were options - a) stand up, b) stay seated - weren't mutually physical possibilities because only one or the other was ever going to happen.

logically possible, i.e., you can imagine in your mind a world where either or could happen, but not physically possible, i.e., it wasn't going to happen that bahman stay seated. he was going to stand up.

basically we're just toasters and meat machines with the privilege (or curse) to experience a life that is a fantastic illusion. It's really quite bizarre.

[Iwannaplato]

If this is the case, it's a tragic situation. Clearly, one would have hoped that at least some of you were intelligent enough to recognize when the parts fit together logically and make sense. Unfortunately, reality does not always conform to our desires. I have faith that subsequent generations will be less brainwashed and more intellectually honest than the current one.

Nor does reality always conform to our faiths. And since your faith is determined, for all you know it's just some stray quale having to with emotions you haven't quite managed to face yet.

[BigMike]

If this is the case, it's a tragic situation. Clearly, one would have hoped that at least some of you were intelligent enough to recognize when the parts fit together logically and make sense. Unfortunately, reality does not always conform to our desires. I have faith that subsequent generations will be less brainwashed and more intellectually honest than the current one.

Nor does reality always conform to our faiths. And since your faith is determined, for all you know it's just some stray quale having to with emotions you haven't quite managed to face yet.

My only criterion for accepting a proposition as true is that it is logically consistent with everything else I accept as true. It is comparable to assembling a jigsaw puzzle. If a piece does not fit, it is discarded; if it does, it is kept. My truth is not based on faith, but on logic. I admit that my logic sometimes has been imperfect, particularly when I was younger, which caused me having to change my mind. And it is very likely that it will occur again. But the more I "know" to be true, the less likely it is that I will have to reject major premises and replace them with newer, better ones. Life itself appears to be a progression of Bayesian inferences that improves over time.

[Immanuel Can]

It would be very encouraging if this group of people could acknowledge what they may consider to be harsh realities, namely that we are all insignificant specks in an enormous physical universe, and then ask how we should proceed.

Sorry, Mikey. Your own theory says we're fated not to.

Just your hard luck, then. If you're right, you can never change anybody's mind. It's tough to be you, but there it is.

Unless, of course, Determinism is false...