Philosophy Now Forum

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 8:38 am I already did my matey

How does:- "moral responsibility" ?? Give free will, in a determined universe any more credence over me choosing to have a hotdog over a salad!

It's a bloody ridiculous notion IF that is all it is based upon.

U gotta drill down to what is going on at the conscious level (as to whether I eat chips or kill someone)

attofishpi wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 8:40 am How does:- "moral responsibility" ?? Give free will, in a determined universe any more credence over me choosing to have a hotdog over a salad!

I don't think I understand the question.

Is sculptor a compatibilist anyway?

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 8:42 am I don't think I understand the question.

I think he is

I don't like you removing parts of my quote that are pertinent to the conversation.

I quoted the question I was answering (or not understatement). Everything else was just commentary by you.

Did you read my post at the top of page 3?

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 8:45 am Did you read my post at the top of page 3?

Yes Jesus I did. I didn't address it because then and now, I don't believe it gets to the core of free will in any metaphysical way. Considering ethics as some answer within a conscious mind that minds therefore have a degree of free will within a determined universe is no different to me as to a conscious mind making a decision to eat chips instead of a burger.

The entire premise, of free will (if ethics alone is what compatibilism is based on) is ridiculous.

The premise of free will is ridiculous, both with and without determinism?

There you go again, is it so hard to quote what I am ACTUALLY stating?

I could quote it, but... Why would I? You've just said it. Why would I quote the post you've just made? If you want to see what I'm replying to, just scroll up a little bit.

But I think, regardless of morality, non compatibilist definitions of free will are generally pretty bad. They suggest that we gain something of value when we allow randomness in. I've never heard an actually good case for that.

...wtf, because through our little chat, it's interesting to see on what points each of us were ACTUALLY addressing - its a no brainer dude, ffs.

..this is ridiculous

Explain in your words why compatibilism, which you state you are a proponent of (which is soley based on ethical behaviour) is logically compatibile within a deterministic universe. (such that free will exists)

Top of page 3. Free will is more or less a synonym for control. Randomness doesn't grant control. Free will is the freedom of our will to control our actions. Our will has that freedom in a deterministic universe (sometimes at least). Therefore, free will as the concept of the will having control is compatible with determinism.

I had some confusion previously in some replies I made, about the definition of "hard determinism". I said hard determinism is, according to a compatibilist, compatible with free will - I thought hard determinism meant something other than what it apparently actually means.

Any comment I made previously about "hard determinism", please disregard. My mistake.

Flannel Jesus wrote: ↑Fri Jan 27, 2023 9:26 am I had some confusion previously in some replies I made, about the definition of "hard determinism". I said hard determinism is, according to a compatibilist, compatible with free will - I thought hard determinism meant something other than what it apparently actually means.

Any comment I made previously about "hard determinism", please disregard. My mistake.

Well said, it's not very often that someone has the bollocks on this forum to admit when they were even slightly wrong about anything.

Like myself. I state, I am learning philosophy from this site, still haven't got around to read the works of the big names in the realm of philosophy. But I like reference to some of their ideas.

I will sit on your statement for now that compatibilism is based on the ethics within the mindset of a conscious mind within a determined universe, and that's how a compatibilist only has an argument for their free-will.

Thus, after that, perhaps I am not declaring myself as a compatibilist if it is soley based on ethics within conscious minds as its premise for free-will (i think it's a rather short of form argument)

Yes, Sculptor is a self declared compatibilist btw.

..perhaps she has something to add re her views on compatibilism.