Doubts are real therefore determinism is false

[bahman]

Yes, I do.

And IWP gave a definition in this thread which seems pretty good.

But you believe that your understanding of doubt makes it possible to conclude something about determinism

How do you define determinism?

Let's not go back to page 1.

Uncertainty and doubt are produced by lack of knowledge. That lack of knowledge is present in both a free-will universe and a determined universe. Therefore doubt is present in both cases. And it cannot be used to distinguish between the two cases.

It's that simple.

I asked for a definition of determinism.

[phyllo]

I asked for a definition of determinism.

Look up a standard definition of "determinism" on wikipedia or somewhere. And I will most likely agree to it. Because the exact definition of "determinism" is not critical to the reasoning.

[bahman]

I asked for a definition of determinism.

Look up a standard definition of "determinism" on wikipedia or somewhere. And I will most likely agree to it. Because the exact definition of "determinism" is not critical to the reasoning.

The definition of determinism matter: Determinsim is a worldview that claims that a state of affairs unqiuly determines the next state of affairs. Could we agree on this definition?

[phyllo]

The definition of determinism matter: Determinsim is a worldview that claims that a state of affairs unqiuly determines the next state of affairs. Could we agree on this definition?

Okay, that's fine.

[bahman]

The definition of determinism matter: Determinsim is a worldview that claims that a state of affairs unqiuly determines the next state of affairs. Could we agree on this definition?

Okay, that's fine.

Now suppose you are in a maze. You reach to a fork and don't know which way is the correct way to exit so you have doubt. There are two questions here: (1) How doubt is possible in a determisnitic world? and (2) Could you pick up a path on the fork?

[phyllo]

Now suppose you are in a maze. You reach to a fork and don't know which way is the correct way to exit so you have doubt. There are two questions here: (1) How doubt is possible in a determisnitic world? and (2) Could you pick up a path on the fork?

(1) How doubt is possible in a determisnitic world?

You just answered that question : you don't know the correct way to exit.

(2) Could you pick up a path on the fork?

I'm not sure how to parse that sentence, but I assume you mean "how do you decide which path to take?

Well, you tend to use a rule or past experience. Left hand rule for mazes. Or "I got out before by picking the left path". Or "That side looks prettier".

[bahman]

Now suppose you are in a maze. You reach to a fork and don't know which way is the correct way to exit so you have doubt. There are two questions here: (1) How doubt is possible in a determisnitic world? and (2) Could you pick up a path on the fork?

(1) How doubt is possible in a determisnitic world?

You just answered that question : you don't know the correct way to exit.

I mean how could you have options on the fork given that you are living in a deterministic world, by a deterministic world I mean one state of affairs uniquely determines another state of affairs and not two state of affairs for example.

(2) Could you pick up a path on the fork?

I'm not sure how to parse that sentence, but I assume you mean "how do you decide which path to take?

Well, you tend to use a rule or past experience. Left hand rule for mazes. Or "I got out before by picking the left path". Or "That side looks prettier".

Suppose you don't have past experiences. Suppose that the paths on the fork look identical in other words non is prettier than another one.

[Iwannaplato]

Thanks for collecting all the example! In non of your example, the object has the subjective experience of doubt.

1) how do you know? 2) how does that prove one is free? It's a feeling. We have all sorts of feelings in all sorts of situations. When we have complicated reactions to a situation, sometimes we feel doubt, sometimes confusion, sometimes irritation. We call the feelings of have the different pulls in us work something out 'doubt'. It doesn't demonstrate there is a lack of determinism. It's the emotional component we have with those situations, where our internal golf ball may or many not fall in the hole, or where the drop on the window pain moving down is pushed one way by the wind and one by gravity and it vibrates before inevitably moving in the direction those various forces lead it to move. We call that tension before release doubt. That state of different pulls is and elicits that feeling.

You can save two kids on one side in the flood or one kid on the other. You are going to choose the two kids, if they are all stranger's kids. But you feel doubt. To move towards the two kids confirms the one kid on the other side is going to die. So, there is a clash, it seems of rules. But after a moment of doubt you save the two kids. It was always going to happen, but when our heuristics our rules our we would nevers clash for a moment, we feel doubt. That is the feeling utterly determined when different rules and parts of us struggle with eachother. It's a feeling and one utterly caused. Just like the way we will end up choosing will be based on what forces in us are strongest.

That there is a pause says nothing about whether we are determined or not. It is not an exception, that happens all the time in things you seem to think are not free.

That there is an attendant feeling says nothing about whether we are determined or not. In fact its just another in a series of causes and effects.

[bahman]

Thanks for collecting all the example! In non of your example, the object has the subjective experience of doubt.

1) how do you know?

I cannot tell, if they have doubt then we have a problem within a deterministic universe anyway.

2) how does that prove one is free?

The existence of doubt and the fact that we can overcome the doubt by choosing one option. Anyway, in this thread I am not focusing on arguing that we are free but an inconsistency between the existence of doubt and determinism.

It's a feeling. We have all sorts of feelings in all sorts of situations. When we have complicated reactions to a situation, sometimes we feel doubt, sometimes confusion, sometimes irritation. We call the feelings of have the different pulls in us work something out 'doubt'. It doesn't demonstrate there is a lack of determinism. It's the emotional component we have with those situations, where our internal golf ball may or many not fall in the hole, or where the drop on the window pain moving down is pushed one way by the wind and one by gravity and it vibrates before inevitably moving in the direction those various forces lead it to move. We call that tension before release doubt. That state of different pulls is and elicits that feeling.

You can save two kids on one side in the flood or one kid on the other. You are going to choose the two kids, if they are all stranger's kids. But you feel doubt. To move towards the two kids confirms the one kid on the other side is going to die. So, there is a clash, it seems of rules. But after a moment of doubt you save the two kids. It was always going to happen, but when our heuristics our rules our we would nevers clash for a moment, we feel doubt. That is the feeling utterly determined when different rules and parts of us struggle with eachother. It's a feeling and one utterly caused. Just like the way we will end up choosing will be based on what forces in us are strongest.

That there is a pause says nothing about whether we are determined or not. It is not an exception, that happens all the time in things you seem to think are not free.

That there is an attendant feeling says nothing about whether we are determined or not. In fact its just another in a series of causes and effects.

So you agree that doubt is real. The problem is how you could have options given that you are living in a deterministic world, by a deterministic world I mean one state of affairs uniquely determines another state of affairs and not two states of affairs for example.

[Iwannaplato]

So you agree that doubt is real. The problem is how you could have options given that you are living in a deterministic world, by a deterministic world I mean one state of affairs uniquely determines another state of affairs and not two states of affairs for example.

Again, you are treating us as utterly unified beings. We aren't. We are multitudes. And some situations lead to struggles between parts. We have a part that says never ever abandon a child in danger. We have the part that says, but we have to save two over one. There is a struggle. We experience doubt about the leaving the one child to die. That doesn't mean we were ever going to do anything else. It is just that parts and rules had a struggle which we give a name doubt. No two states of affairs were caused. One state of affairs was caused. We saved the two kids. But of course if you get punched by two people, each punching you in the head very hard, it may not be clear for a moment which way you will fall, but you were only ever going to fall in one direction. It's not two states of affairs, but more complicated causes led to a momentary seeming stasis.

If we were binary machines when any cause affected the whole of our being in exactly one way, we either chirp yes or no when triggered by anything and our whole being always reacts as one unitary thing, well, then it's all simple. But we are not unitiary things. We have brain halfs that react differently. We have nexuses around the heart and gut that react to stimuli differently from each other. It's like a committee.

If you ask a committee - hey wanna get covered and in gasoline and get boiled, there will be not struggle over the decision. All the parts of the committee will instantly agree. No, we don't want to be burned to death. No debate, nothing.

But ask them about some complicated change in the organizations spending and bam a big pause. But the power of the members of the committee and alliances and preconceptions in members and desires will all lead to one possible conclusion, even if it seems like it 'might go either way' because we lack the knowledge to see who wil win when there are so many causes and effects.

We aren't billiard balls and we are not simple units.

And no where have you shown how doubt is evidence against determinism. I can understand it feels that way.

But the pause means nothing and the feeling is precisely that: the feeling when our inner diverse parts are struggling with each other. Just as forces in nature struggle with each other but that cloud was always gonna rain and that stone was always going to slide again down the hillside on that path, even though it seemed like it might stop forever as diverse forces worked it out.

[bahman]

So you agree that doubt is real. The problem is how you could have options given that you are living in a deterministic world, by a deterministic world I mean one state of affairs uniquely determines another state of affairs and not two states of affairs for example.

Again, you are treating us as utterly unified beings. We aren't. We are multitudes. And some situations lead to struggles between parts. We have a part that says never ever abandon a child in danger. We have the part that says, but we have to save two over one. There is a struggle. We experience doubt about the leaving the one child to die. That doesn't mean we were ever going to do anything else. It is just that parts and rules had a struggle which we give a name doubt. No two states of affairs were caused. One state of affairs was caused. We saved the two kids. But of course if you get punched by two people, each punching you in the head very hard, it may not be clear for a moment which way you will fall, but you were only ever going to fall in one direction. It's not two states of affairs, but more complicated causes led to a momentary seeming stasis.

If we were binary machines when any cause affected the whole of our being in exactly one way, we either chirp yes or no when triggered by anything and our whole being always reacts as one unitary thing, well, then it's all simple. But we are not unitiary things. We have brain halfs that react differently. We have nexuses around the heart and gut that react to stimuli differently from each other. It's like a committee.

If you ask a committee - hey wanna get covered and in gasoline and get boiled, there will be not struggle over the decision. All the parts of the committee will instantly agree. No, we don't want to be burned to death. No debate, nothing.

But ask them about some complicated change in the organizations spending and bam a big pause. But the power of the members of the committee and alliances and preconceptions in members and desires will all lead to one possible conclusion, even if it seems like it 'might go either way' because we lack the knowledge to see who wil win when there are so many causes and effects.

We aren't billiard balls and we are not simple units.

And no where have you shown how doubt is evidence against determinism. I can understand it feels that way.

But the pause means nothing and the feeling is precisely that: the feeling when our inner diverse parts are struggling with each other. Just as forces in nature struggle with each other but that cloud was always gonna rain and that stone was always going to slide again down the hillside on that path, even though it seemed like it might stop forever as diverse forces worked it out.

Let me simplify our life with the following situation: Let's assume you are trapped in a maze. You walk in the maze and reach to a fork. There is a sign on the fork with the information that one path leads to exit and another leads to a trap that causes death when you approach it. You however can stay on the fork since you are supported with food and water as long as you stay there. Now tell me what you are going to do: (1) Take the left path, (2) Take the right path, or (3) Stay on the fork and live your life?

[phyllo]

I mean how could you have options on the fork given that you are living in a deterministic world, by a deterministic world I mean one state of affairs uniquely determines another state of affairs and not two state of affairs for example.

I don't understand what you're asking here.

Are you suggesting that the existence of the fork in itself proves that there is free-will?

Are you no longer talking about doubt?

Suppose you don't have past experiences. Suppose that the paths on the fork look identical in other words non is prettier than another one.

There is nobody without experiences except maybe a baby.

It things look identical then people will use another criteria.

And people have preferences for one side or the other ... they have a dominant hand, a dominant eye and a dominant leg.

[bahman]

I mean how could you have options on the fork given that you are living in a deterministic world, by a deterministic world I mean one state of affairs uniquely determines another state of affairs and not two state of affairs for example.

I don't understand what you're asking here.

I am saying that in a deterministic world, one state of affairs always leads to only a single state of affairs and not two or more.

Are you suggesting that the existence of the fork in itself proves that there is free-will?

I am not talking about free will here.

Are you no longer talking about doubt?

I am talking about doubt and the problem related to that in a deterministic worldview.

Suppose you don't have past experiences. Suppose that the paths on the fork look identical in other words non is prettier than another one.

There is nobody without experiences except maybe a baby.

It things look identical then people will use another criteria.

And people have preferences for one side or the other ... they have a dominant hand, a dominant eye and a dominant leg.

Please read my response to IWP here.

[phyllo]

I am saying that in a deterministic world, one state of affairs always leads to only a single state of affairs and not two or more.

Both determinism and free-will lead to only one state because only one thing ever happens ... one is always choosing one option to execute.

Please read my response to IWP here.

Let me simplify our life with the following situation: Let's assume you are trapped in a maze. You walk in the maze and reach to a fork. There is a sign on the fork with the information that one path leads to exit and another leads to a trap that causes death when you approach it. You however can stay on the fork since you are supported with food and water as long as you stay there. Now tell me what you are going to do: (1) Take the left path, (2) Take the right path, or (3) Stay on the fork and live your life?

I don't see the relevance.

Most people would pick the path for the exit because they don't want to stay there forever and they don't want to die.

But that's only true if they believe that the signs are stating true facts.

What if they don't believe the signs? What if they doubt the signs?

[bahman]

I am saying that in a deterministic world, one state of affairs always leads to only a single state of affairs and not two or more.

Both determinism and free-will lead to only one state because only one thing ever happens ... one is always choosing one option to execute.

Correct, but in the case when we have doubt there are at least two options to choose from. Two options are not allowed in a deterministic world.

Please read my response to IWP here.

Let me simplify our life with the following situation: Let's assume you are trapped in a maze. You walk in the maze and reach to a fork. There is a sign on the fork with the information that one path leads to exit and another leads to a trap that causes death when you approach it. You however can stay on the fork since you are supported with food and water as long as you stay there. Now tell me what you are going to do: (1) Take the left path, (2) Take the right path, or (3) Stay on the fork and live your life?

I don't see the relevance.

Most people would pick the path for the exit because they don't want to stay there forever and they don't want to die.

But that's only true if they believe that the signs are stating true facts.

What if they don't believe the signs? What if they doubt the signs?

The information on the sign tells you that one path leads to the exit and another one to the trap but it does not tell you which path, the left or right one, leads to the trap or exit.