Philosophy Now Forum

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 4:54 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 4:32 pm Generally it's wise to seek and remedy the cause of a man's bad behaviour instead of simplistically blaming the man.

You're missing the whole point of Determinism.

If Determinism is true, there is no "remedy" for anything that happens: there is only whatever happens. And while you're right that nobody is to praise or blame for anything, if Determinism is true, then you're wrong to suppose anything can be remedied, fixed, changed or even improved under a Deterministic assumption.

Determinism is strictly and absolutely fatalistic. It does not countenance the possibility of change, except as a descriptor of causes and effects taking whatever inevitable path they do. And human attributions of moral worth refer to absolutely no objective reality.

Given Determinism, whatever is, is -- bad or good, it's what you get.

Again you confuse fatalism with determinism. Fatalism is determinism minus the freedom we have to create changes. And please don't confuse freedom with the superstition of Free Will.

People who are most creative are those who are best informed of causes and effects.

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 9:38 pm Fatalism is determinism minus the freedom we have to create changes.

No, Determinism IS a form of fatalism. It denies we CAN "create changes."

You need to get your terms right.

de·ter·min·ism
/dəˈtərməˌnizəm/
Learn to pronounce
nounPhilosophy
noun: determinism

the doctrine that all events, including human action, are ultimately determined by causes external to the will. Some philosophers have taken determinism to imply that individual human beings have no free will and cannot be held morally responsible for their actions. (Oxford)

Here's another:

determinism, in philosophy and science, the thesis that all events in the universe, including human decisions and actions, are causally inevitable. Determinism entails that, in a situation in which a person makes a certain decision or performs a certain action, it is impossible that he or she could have made any other decision or performed any other action. In other words, it is never true that people could have decided or acted otherwise than they actually did. (Britannica, emphasis mine)

That's "all" events, "including human action." There is no "creating changes." Nothing ever happens, according to Determinism, but what was bound to happen regardless of human will. And it is utterly impossible that anybody could have made a better decision or even a different decision than they actually did. It's complete fatalism, with no exceptions.

There is no concession to your desire to "change" things. At best, that's just your delusion...and the delusion of every other living human being who has ever inhabited the planet, maybe, but still a delusion, according to them.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 2:59 pm

uwot wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 2:54 pm Or it has been determined for me.

That's assuming I have self-determination.

There's a trivial way to falsify the first and confirm the 2nd. Determine to be something else about yourself.

It is less than trivial. You are assuming the conclusion, begging the question, committing the sort of informal fallacy we long ago established that neither of us gives a fuck about. I am not a determinist for the simple reason that I don't like the idea. My strongest argument against determinism is that if my beliefs and behaviour are the product of immutable forces, they could in principle be calculated to predict my future behaviour unerringly. It is my firm belief that being presented with that future, I could choose to do otherwise. There is no immediate prospect of that being tested, so I simply stick with the option I prefer/am stuck with. I don't believe in determinism any more than I believe in any god you choose to name, but I concede that pretty much anything is possible.

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 1:49 am It is less than trivial. You are assuming the conclusion, begging the question, committing the sort of informal fallacy we long ago established that neither of us gives a fuck about. I am not a determinist for the simple reason that I don't like the idea.

So you are a "non-determinist" who knows how to determine the degree of triviality; the (in)formality of fallacies etc. etc.

Gotcha!

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 1:49 am My strongest argument against determinism...

I thought we'd established by now that neither of us gives a fuck about arguments.

At least, I certainly don't. Not without having some mechanism to determine which argument I ought to select; and which to discard.

In as much as I have something in my head which makes me "like" some stuff and not other. e.g I have something which determines, I guess I am a determinist. Or a determiner

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 1:49 am is that if my beliefs and behaviour are the product of immutable forces, they could in principle be calculated to predict my future behaviour unerringly. It is my firm belief that being presented with that future, I could choose to do otherwise.

If that's your "strongest argument" I'd venture a wild prediction that you've never heard of Newcomb's paradox..

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 6:56 am

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 1:49 am It is less than trivial. You are assuming the conclusion, begging the question, committing the sort of informal fallacy we long ago established that neither of us gives a fuck about. I am not a determinist for the simple reason that I don't like the idea.

So you are a "non-determinist" who knows how to determine the degree of triviality; the (in)formality of fallacies etc. etc.

Gotcha!

You clearly haven't. Whether my determinations are determined deterministically or of my own free will makes no determinable difference.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 6:56 am

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 1:49 am My strongest argument against determinism...

I thought we'd established by now that neither of us gives a fuck about arguments.

That isn't what I said.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 6:56 amAt least, I certainly don't. Not without having some mechanism to determine which argument I ought to select; and which to discard.

So you don't care about arguments, except you do.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 6:56 amIn as much as I have something in my head which makes me "like" some stuff and not other. e.g I have something which determines, I guess I am a determinist. Or a determiner

Well, if that thing in your head is what makes certain decisions for you, are you in those instances choosing freely?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 6:56 am

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 1:49 am is that if my beliefs and behaviour are the product of immutable forces, they could in principle be calculated to predict my future behaviour unerringly. It is my firm belief that being presented with that future, I could choose to do otherwise.

If that's your "strongest argument" I'd venture a wild prediction that you've never heard of Newcomb's paradox..

Given that the nub of my argument is that I don't believe future behaviour can be predicted, why would I care about an argument, which you don't care about, except you do, that is predicated precisely on what I don't believe possible?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 10:22 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Mar 01, 2022 9:38 pm Fatalism is determinism minus the freedom we have to create changes.

No, Determinism IS a form of fatalism. It denies we CAN "create changes."

You need to get your terms right.

de·ter·min·ism
/dəˈtərməˌnizəm/
Learn to pronounce
nounPhilosophy
noun: determinism

the doctrine that all events, including human action, are ultimately determined by causes external to the will. Some philosophers have taken determinism to imply that individual human beings have no free will and cannot be held morally responsible for their actions. (Oxford)

Here's another:

determinism, in philosophy and science, the thesis that all events in the universe, including human decisions and actions, are causally inevitable. Determinism entails that, in a situation in which a person makes a certain decision or performs a certain action, it is impossible that he or she could have made any other decision or performed any other action. In other words, it is never true that people could have decided or acted otherwise than they actually did. (Britannica, emphasis mine)

That's "all" events, "including human action." There is no "creating changes." Nothing ever happens, according to Determinism, but what was bound to happen regardless of human will. And it is utterly impossible that anybody could have made a better decision or even a different decision than they actually did. It's complete fatalism, with no exceptions.

There is no concession to your desire to "change" things. At best, that's just your delusion...and the delusion of every other living human being who has ever inhabited the planet, maybe, but still a delusion, according to them.

Fatalism, and Calvinistic predestination, are malign travesties of determinism.

Belinda wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 12:52 pm Fatalism, and Calvinistic predestination, are malign travesties of determinism.

Not according to Oxford or Britannica. Rather, they are prime examples of Determinism.

I think you've just redefined "Determinism" to mean, "Whatever view Belinda likes." But that's not the definition anyone else is using. So we'd be better to go with the normal one.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 2:46 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 12:52 pm Fatalism, and Calvinistic predestination, are malign travesties of determinism.

Not according to Oxford or Britannica. Rather, they are prime examples of Determinism.

I think you've just redefined "Determinism" to mean, "Whatever view Belinda likes." But that's not the definition anyone else is using. So we'd be better to go with the normal one.

According to Miriam Webster:

Definition of determinism

1 philosophy a : a theory or doctrine that acts of the will (see will entry 2 sense 4a), occurrences in nature, or social or psychological phenomena are causally determined by preceding events or natural laws
b : a belief in predestination
2 : the quality or state of being determined

and:

Definition of determine

transitive verb
1a : to fix conclusively or authoritatively determine national policy
b law : to decide by judicial sentence determine a plea
c : to settle or decide by choice of alternatives or possibilities trying to determine the best time to go
d : resolve she determined to do better
2a : to fix the form, position, or character of beforehand : ordain two points determine a straight line the extent to which genetics determines one's personality
b : to bring about as a result : regulate demand determines the price
3a : to fix the boundaries of
b : to limit in extent or scope
c : to put or set an end to : terminate determine an estate
4 : to find out or come to a decision about by investigation, reasoning, or calculation determine the answer to the problem determine a position at sea
5 biology : to bring about the determination (see determination sense 7) of determine the fate of a cell

intransitive verb
1 : to come to a decision had determined on becoming a doctor
2 : to come to an end or become void

While your view of determinism is very common, it is not beyond reasonable understanding to view determinism as meaning, "everything is determined only means there is an explanation or reason for everything and that nothing happens by caprice, inexplicably, miraculously, or by magic." There is no reason one cannot say their own behavior is, determined, by their own conscious choice. Physics is not the only thing that determines events except to physicalists.

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 3:50 pm There is no reason one cannot say their own behavior is, determined, by their own conscious choice.

There's no reason one can't "say" anything...of course, that doesn't mean that everything one "says" makes sense.

I can say, "square circle" and "married bachelor," very easily. I can also say "determined by my choice," but if I do, I can't mean the ideology of Determinism. I can only be using the term "determined" colloquially, as a synonym for "decided". But if I "decided" and my decision "determined" anything, than the ideology of Determinism is simply false.

That's the difference between precise usage and casual usage of words. And that's really basic in linguistics.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 3:56 pm

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 3:50 pm There is no reason one cannot say their own behavior is, determined, by their own conscious choice.

There's no reason one can't "say" anything...of course, that doesn't mean that everything one "says" makes sense.

I can say, "square circle" and "married bachelor," very easily. I can also say "determined by my choice," but if I do, I can't mean the ideology of Determinism. I can only be using the term "determined" colloquially, as a synonym for "decided". But if I "decided" and my decision "determined" anything, than the ideology of Determinism is simply false.

That's the difference between precise usage and casual usage of words. And that's really basic in linguistics.

Is there some, "God of linquistics?" I'm just pointing out your priggishness about how others must use words is not reasonable. It's academic pompous pedantry.

When someone makes a choice they consciously determined their action. If that is not a kind of determinism, what is it? It's not an accident.

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 4:40 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 3:56 pm

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 3:50 pm There is no reason one cannot say their own behavior is, determined, by their own conscious choice.

There's no reason one can't "say" anything...of course, that doesn't mean that everything one "says" makes sense.

I can say, "square circle" and "married bachelor," very easily. I can also say "determined by my choice," but if I do, I can't mean the ideology of Determinism. I can only be using the term "determined" colloquially, as a synonym for "decided". But if I "decided" and my decision "determined" anything, than the ideology of Determinism is simply false.

That's the difference between precise usage and casual usage of words. And that's really basic in linguistics.

Is there some, "God of linquistics?"

No. It's a field of knowledge. In fact, it's a field taught at most universities.

The basic concept is this: when somebody says, "I'm determined to pass my entrance exam next Thursday," they mean something quite different from, "There is no possible way I can do anything but pass my entrance exam."

Determinism means the latter. You seem to be conflating the former with the latter, and that's causing the confusion. There are distinct uses of the word "determined," but "Determinism" is quite specific.

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 12:28 pm You clearly haven't. Whether my determinations are determined deterministically or of my own free will makes no determinable difference.

I clearly have. You have determined THAT "......makes no determinable difference"

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 12:28 pm Well, if that thing in your head is what makes certain decisions for you, are you in those instances choosing freely?

Irrespective of the qualification (free, slowly, cautiously, desperately, lavishly, irately). Irrespective of how I feel about my choosing I would still be choosing.

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 12:28 pm Given that the nub of my argument is that I don't believe future behaviour can be predicted.

What a peculiar belief. Given that I predict I am about to drink some wine. And wouldn't you know it...

uwot wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 12:28 pm why would I care about an argument, which you don't care about, except you do, that is predicated precisely on what I don't believe possible?

I don't care about the argument precisely for the reasons that you keep arguing that the possible is impossible.

I've come to generally expect that when people make arguments they have no fucking idea what you are talking about; or why they are talking about it.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 2:46 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 12:52 pm Fatalism, and Calvinistic predestination, are malign travesties of determinism.

Not according to Oxford or Britannica. Rather, they are prime examples of Determinism.

I think you've just redefined "Determinism" to mean, "Whatever view Belinda likes." But that's not the definition anyone else is using. So we'd be better to go with the normal one.

Philosophers discussing Free Will or determinism need a specialist dictionary of philosophy.

By determinism philosophers mean that what happens necessarily happened and could not have happened otherwise than it did. (Note the past tense).

All events are caused events does not imply fate caused or will cause any event.

All events are caused events does not imply omnipotent God ruled that some of His creatures are damned from eternity.(Calvinistic predestination)

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 5:30 pm

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 4:40 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 3:56 pm
There's no reason one can't "say" anything...of course, that doesn't mean that everything one "says" makes sense.

I can say, "square circle" and "married bachelor," very easily. I can also say "determined by my choice," but if I do, I can't mean the ideology of Determinism. I can only be using the term "determined" colloquially, as a synonym for "decided". But if I "decided" and my decision "determined" anything, than the ideology of Determinism is simply false.

That's the difference between precise usage and casual usage of words. And that's really basic in linguistics.

Is there some, "God of linquistics?"

No. It's a field of knowledge. In fact, it's a field taught at most universities.

The basic concept is this: when somebody says, "I'm determined to pass my entrance exam next Thursday," they mean something quite different from, "There is no possible way I can do anything but pass my entrance exam."

Determinism means the latter. You seem to be conflating the former with the latter, and that's causing the confusion. There are distinct uses of the word "determined," but "Determinism" is quite specific.

No, I mean determined as in, "the judge determined the sentence would be 30 days."

Belinda wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 8:47 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 2:46 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 12:52 pm Fatalism, and Calvinistic predestination, are malign travesties of determinism.

Not according to Oxford or Britannica. Rather, they are prime examples of Determinism.

I think you've just redefined "Determinism" to mean, "Whatever view Belinda likes." But that's not the definition anyone else is using. So we'd be better to go with the normal one.

Philosophers discussing Free Will or determinism need a specialist dictionary of philosophy.

Well, to be a philosopher is to be interested in getting difficult questions right...and where one cannot get an answer, to at least advance the clarity of the question. For that reason, they have an intense interest in making terms specific and precise. That's what they are "specialists" in. So yes, it requires some tuning up of one's dictionary; but that's the price of admission to the game. It's necessary.

By determinism philosophers mean that what happens necessarily happened and could not have happened otherwise than it did.

Yess...and?

All events are caused events does not imply fate caused or will cause any event.

It's hard to know what you mean by "caused," then. Determinism does not permit that any event is "caused" by human will. That's dumb, I'll admit; but that's what they think.

All events are caused events does not imply omnipotent God ruled that some of His creatures are damned from eternity.(Calvinistic predestination)

No, that is correct. There are two forms of Determinism, at least.

1. Theistic Determinism, which is essentialliy Calvinism, and takes the existence of God as its first premise.

2. Secular or Atheistic Determinism, which presumes no God, and which depends on a faith in Materialism or Physicalism held without proof and in defiance of routine existential phenomena.

So, I suppose, you can pick either form of the poison. They both end up with the same claim: nothing a human being ever knows or does "changes" anything. The ultimate answer for why every single thing happens in the universe, including every cognition a person can have, is the existence of some prior non-human force or entity.