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

[henry quirk]

The "it" I'm referring to was your initial wording, which did imply 100% chance, which is why I subsequently worded it as "guranteed". You agreed with that wording, instead of saying something like "no you misunderstood me".

I'm just gonna chalk it up to poor comprehension and wording on my part.

My mistake.

[Flannel Jesus]

, I'm not seein' any on-line definition describing guarantee as 100% chance.

Google defines it as a noun and separately as a verb. Definition 2 of the verb part says "promise with certainty."

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictio ... /guarantee

"If something is guaranteed to happen or have a particular result, it is certain that it will happen or have that result"

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/guarantee

Verb, To make something certain.

[henry quirk]

Okay. I've acknowledged my fault. I'm done with this rehash. Is there anything on free will or the topic in the subject line you wanna discuss?

[Flannel Jesus]

Well, the thing I wanted to discuss, we were discussing, until you said "There would be no change". That was the point that that conversation got cut short.

[henry quirk]

Well, the thing I wanted to discuss, we were discussing, until you said "There would be no change". That was the point that that conversation got cut short.

Did I say There would be no change? I thought I asked all things bein' equal, why would Junior decline the nip?

Those two don't seem to be the same.

Anyway...

[Flannel Jesus]

Did I say There would be no change?

Yes, those were very literally your words.

[Wizard22]

This response can go toward FJ, popeye, belinda, and the rest as well.

This is generally my position. I think arguments in favor of determinism make more sense than the ones I've seen so far for free will. But I don't consider it case closed.

But what's your argument for free will?

When you decide to do something what leads to your actions that is not compelled by your desires, goals, values and then external factors and the situation?

We have moment A and then moment B.

When you choose at moment B something leads to you choosing that was not there in the precise instant before that. Your state and the state of things around you. What is that?

And wouldn't you want to do what your desires and knowledge would lead you to do?

I'm going to throw an Epistemological wrench in this equation.

What are my or your desires? What are my or your knowledge? What is the act of 'possessing' either, desire or knowledge? Did you or I, invent these letters or words we write with? Did we create the culture that preceded us? No, but our predecessors did. How much of what we inherit, are 'theirs'? All of it? Some of it? How much of it?

How much of 'I' do you or I control? How much do we have power over? If we only have control over a small portion, then we only have freedom to the relatively small amount of (self-)control, correct?

Therein Free-Will implies a much larger degree of Self-Control as well.

[Wizard22]

You ought to say Free Will is randomness, because Free Will is randomness. Unless you want to learn I can teach you nothing.

It seems random to you, yes. Maybe you lack empathy and the ability to 'place' your mind into another's? Do you have children? Most women have degrees of empathy related to the babies they birth. Mother-Child develops an affinity for cognitive and emotional transcription, an ability to 'read' and write emotions and thoughts to one-another.

Maybe you lacked this in your life, I don't know, just a guess. It's not a one-way street. It's not only the mother, to the child. It is also from the child, to the mother. And in this, a mother can understand the Will of her child.

Again, I thought things like this were common sense. I guess not, anymore. Or maybe people are just forgetful, a Demented state like the illegitimate US president. Dementia is quite accursed. You've forgotten the core aspects of life where people find meaning and value.


Why shouldn't the Will be Free???

[Wizard22]

If freedom of will is measured by self-control, as the Determinists would prefer it be, then they go on to claim that any and every Man controls very little of himself, because he inherits very little that is 'authentically' or 'wholly' "his own". Or worst case ...that a man has no control over himself whatsoever.

This is the Determinist premise, NOT MINE, and not the Free-Willists. I implore you, Determinists of this thread, to reconsider this and examine how much self-control you have. If you have none, so be it. But do you have 'some'? Do you have a tiny amount? Do you have a fraction?

And does that fraction represent free-will or not? Explain yourself.

[Flannel Jesus]

If freedom of will is measured by self-control, as the Determinists would prefer it be, then they go on to claim that any and every Man controls very little of himself, because he inherits very little that is 'authentically' or 'wholly' "his own". Or worst case ...that a man has no control over himself whatsoever.

This is the Determinist premise, NOT MINE, and not the Free-Willists.

Based on this post of yours, and I suppose many others, it doesn't seem to me like you understand what determinists think. In fact, a huge portion of the arguments you make in this thread don't come across as pertinent to the conversation at all.

[Wizard22]

Then how else do Hard Determinists separate themselves from Soft Determinists?

You keep slipping in differences of what is 'Compatible' about Free-Will. Now that the context of self-control, awareness, knowledge, are part of this picture, you default to claiming I don't understand. Are you projecting here? What am I missing exactly?

I've already gone over the point of what a Determinist knows of Causality or Physics is dubious from the start. So why would a Determinist know about him/herself as well?


Determinists are claiming that life, and the universe, are 'determined' insofar as they subjectively feel and intuit that life "should be" a certain way.

I can quote Determinists verbatim. I can quote what you and others have said and claimed. Did you forget?

[Flannel Jesus]

You're missing almost everything, because you spend more time lecturing people on what they believe, according to you, than taking to them about what they believe *according to themselves* and listening

[Wizard22]

You keep repeating this error that I don't know what Determinists think and/or I haven't debated many... MANY of them before.

You do realize I spent 5 years in a University Philosophy degree, correct?


So you can keep assuming I don't know what I'm talking about—it just doesn't help whatever point you're trying to make.

Determinists believe... that effects proceed from causes. Wow. That's not saying much. Is that the extent of your belief-system?

I mean, this shouldn't be a grade-school conversation. We're far beyond that, aren't we?

[Flannel Jesus]

You do realize I spent 5 years in a University Philosophy degree, correct?

How would I realize that? Have you told me that before?

[Flannel Jesus]

In any case, most posts you make demonstrate a lack of understanding of what determinists think, and what the conversation is even about. I'm not really concerned with your credentials here.

Most academic philosophers are compatibilists, and I'm a compatibilist. If we want to appeal to credentials I can do it too