Does the "Free Will" point of view affect morals and character?

[Iwannaplato]

I've posted the following several times, in-forum. This seems a good time to post it again.

Interviewing the dead Albert Einstein about free will

by Jon Rappoport

It was a strange journey into the astral realm to find Albert Einstein.

It's easier to make up the arguments of someone, then to actually face them in the real person. To fantasize can have a self-congratulatory emptiness.

That said I have used a similar argument against determinism AND thinking one is rational.

On the other hand, any problems a determinist has thinking they are being rational are nicely matched by the problems someone believing in free will has explaining why they would do things differently then the prior moment, including them and their desires, would lead to. They consider themselves agents. Their will is choosing this action and not that one. There will is what it is in that moment. Why would it ever do anything different in that moment. Past including person moment A leads to Present including moment B. Why would that transition ever be different.

It might be. I don't rule it out. But I see no justification for why or how from any free will advocate.

[Flannel Jesus]

How convenient that Einstein isn't around to have the conversation himself, so anybody can make him say anything they want. That dialogue doesn't do much for me, unfortunately, and it's littered with one consistent confusion : the idea that if a "particle" doesn't have some property, that property cannot emerge from things made of that particle. The entire dialogue seems fundamentally ignorant of the entire concept of emergence.

[henry quirk]

It's easier to make up the arguments of someone, then to actually face them in the real person. To fantasize can have a self-congratulatory emptiness.

Their will is choosing this action and not that one.

No libertarian free willist I know of sez my will is choosing this action. I certainly don't.

Why would that transition ever be different.

All things bein' equal, why would someone choose differently?

[Flannel Jesus]

All things bein' equal, why would someone choose differently?

Ignoring, for a moment, the question of WHY, the fact of the matter is that if you don't think they would ever choose differently, that's... determinism

[henry quirk]

How convenient that Einstein isn't around to have the conversation himself, so anybody can make him say anything they want.

the idea that if a "particle" doesn't have some property, that property cannot emerge from things made of that particle

There's nuthin' in the piece disputing emergence as a reality. I doubt Rappoport denies the existence of water.

[henry quirk]

All things bein' equal, why would someone choose differently?

Ignoring, for a moment, the question of WHY, the fact of the matter is that if you don't think they would ever choose differently, that's... determinism

No, determinism sez they can't choose differently, can't change their mind.

[Iwannaplato]

That guy made up an Einstein who wasn't as smart as Einstein.

Their will is choosing this action and not that one.

No libertarian free willist I know of sez my will is choosing this action. I certainly don't.

I agree. But free will. Your will is free. Of the will is free. You are a free will. You guys don't call yourselves free people. The will is free. Now I agree, it is you who are free, but what is the will that is free that is you. Is it not you desiring and having goals?

Why would that transition ever be different.

All things bein' equal, why would someone choose differently?

Yeah. That moment, you would choose always the same way, because you have that will, those desires, that sense of your options.

If you would choose differently if given some way to run through that exact moment a few times, why would you: same desires, same knowledge, same goals, same state of feeling (tired, pissy, lonely, whatever). Why would that state and you as an agent possibly choose something else? Why would that second lead to any other choice?

I am not saying it can't. I don't know.

But why would it? If you are the agent in that instant, then why would you choose in some way that fits your desires, knowledge, etc. less?

[Iwannaplato]

All things bein' equal, why would someone choose differently?

Ignoring, for a moment, the question of WHY, the fact of the matter is that if you don't think they would ever choose differently, that's... determinism

No, determinism sez they can't choose differently, can't change their mind.

So, you could. Why would you? What is that motivation that would make you choose something that you are less drawn to?

And if you could but never do, I am not sure what the problem with Compatibilism is for you.

[henry quirk]

what is the will that is free that is you. Is it not you desiring and having goals?

There isn't some part I can point to. I am a free will, a person. I'm a whole.

why would you choose in some way that fits your desires, knowledge, etc. less?

All things bein' equal between the original moment and a replay of that moment: I haven't a clue. Hell, even in not-equal, but similar, real world circumstances I'm inclined to repeat myself. If it ain't broke, why fix it?

[henry quirk]

I am not sure what the problem with Compatibilism is for you.

As I say up thread: when I was an atheist and materialist, I was a compatibilist. It worked for me...until it didn't.

[Wizard22]

Does the quoted piece come from FJ's link?

Looks like he posted it...

Regardless, I disagree with any notion of free-will "as long as it's also determined".

The point of free-will is that it is Un-determined. It is Non-determined. This should be common sense, but they don't seem to be aware of this. Humans must contend with what is Known, versus what is Unknown (Epistemological limits). There is Past-unknowns, Present-unknowns, Future-unknowns. So free-will is the Active force (not "reactive") that pushes human decision-making into that Unknown. This all-encompassing notion of "Determinism" is a false presumption, that everything (including the future) is "Known already".

This is false.

Do humans even have good memories of the past? No...of course not. People barely remember 10 seconds ago.

[Belinda]

You are quite right . I better have said that if people who say they believe in Free Will think about it to its logical conclusion then they will see the corollary of absolute Free Will is that people can be absolutely blamed for wrongdoing.

When Free Will is not believed in people can say "He is not a bad man , he is a man who does wrong" . The latter is an example of mercy as we can try to make him behave better, and try to prevent others doing bad things.

Now hold on, B. Yes, a man is morally responsible for himself. If he does wrong: it's his wrong and the consequences are his to bear. That's not, however, sayin' he's a bad man. He may in fact be a bad man, but it's not a given.

You assign stuff to us libertarian free willists that just ain't so.

The question of personal responsibility for wrong- doing or right- doing is the main issue from the free will/determinism debate. It concerns all who love justice and try to get a just penal system.It also concerns parents and teachers who want to rear a properly socialised child into a responsible adult.
Few would doubt there are bad deeds, and personalities that tend to bad deeds. Personality is caused by biological inheritance plus cultural conditioning.

People who try to reform criminals are rightly concerned to get criminals to take responsibility for their wrong doing and not blame circumstances. However there is an important difference between blaming on the one hand, and taking responsibility on the other hand. Taking responsibility for one's own behaviour and beliefs is what a truly autonomous adult does. The most courageous take responsibility even when circumstances are stacked against them.

Blaming does not conduce to the courage necessary for shouldering responsibility and may well have the opposite effect. If a man is labelled ''a Bad Man" he has little or no incentive to be a better man than he was.

[Agent Smith]

Is that a question or a statement?

Observe mon ami, the cars ... the trucks ... the two-wheelers, the pedestrians ... and ... what a cute little dog!! There mon ami, there ... too late ... it's turned into the other street. Now, did ya bring that book I told you ta bring?

Yep.


Good. Turn to page 437. The title, only the title, mon ami, read it aloud.

It says The (honk, honk, honk)

Hmmm. Observe mon ami, the cars ... the ... we're not in the same boat, eh?

Hahahaha, on the same page, young Poirot, on the same page.

Good or bad?

I ... I ...

Tut tut! That's today's lesson. Tomorrow we try something new.

[Wizard22]

Personality is caused by biological inheritance plus cultural conditioning.

PLUS the choice of the individual!

Is it a mere coincidence that you left out the most crucial and necessary ingredient?!

[Iwannaplato]

what is the will that is free that is you. Is it not you desiring and having goals?

There isn't some part I can point to. I am a free will, a person. I'm a whole.

why would you choose in some way that fits your desires, knowledge, etc. less?

All things bein' equal between the original moment and a replay of that moment: I haven't a clue. Hell, even in not-equal, but similar, real world circumstances I'm inclined to repeat myself. If it ain't broke, why fix it?

But you get the issue: why wouldn't you be true to your desires, motives, character and knowledge? What other thing would cause you not to do what you would always have done?