Philosophy Now Forum

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2023 5:02 pm**

When I chose to commit a crime, or not commit a crime I make a decision. The decision is based on a nexus of causalities which include all antecedent conditions including my motivation, volition, physical and mental needs, education, socialisation, experience ad infinitem. It might be difficult for another to predict my choice. But that choice can only make sense if it is the sum of those causalities, the things that make me who I am. There are laws that might deter me, or encourage me. but it is not free in an absolute sense that I am free of the deterministic condition of the universe, the laws and cause and effect which cause my decision to be made of necessity to the conditions at that moment. It is an inescapable truth that I am determined to act thus, and in the full knowledge of the consequences and the responsibility which is wholly mine, I make the choice. Free will is illusory, such choices are determined or would be meaningless. I am that agent of determinism compatible with causality and the exercise of my will.

But apparently, God gives us free will. And about that, we have no choice, because he insists upon it. Unless you are a Calvinist, then you don't.

ANyone care to refute?

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2023 6:36 pm**

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 5:02 pm When I chose to commit a crime, or not commit a crime I make a decision. The decision is based on a nexus of causalities which include all antecedent conditions including my motivation, volition, physical and mental needs, education, socialisation, experience ad infinitem. It might be difficult for another to predict my choice. But that choice can only make sense if it is the sum of those causalities, the things that make me who I am. There are laws that might deter me, or encourage me. but it is not free in an absolute sense that I am free of the deterministic condition of the universe, the laws and cause and effect which cause my decision to be made of necessity to the conditions at that moment. It is an inescapable truth that I am determined to act thus, and in the full knowledge of the consequences and the responsibility which is wholly mine, I make the choice. Free will is illusory, such choices are determined or would be meaningless. I am that agent of determinism compatible with causality and the exercise of my will.

But apparently, God gives us free will. And about that, we have no choice, because he insists upon it. Unless you are a Calvinist, then you don't.

ANyone care to refute?

Well, "decision," "motivation," "volition," "education," "socialization," "experience"...all are cognitive and non-material phenomena. How many feet are there in an "education"? What kind of a thermometer can measure "volition"? Can you add a slice of "motivation" to your cake batter, or does a "decision" weigh six pounds or seven? And how many calories in an "experience"?

See? They're phenomena of consciousness. So if you invoke them, you've already undermined that argument totally. You're including personal consciousness in your description of causality. So the description's not deterministic at all.

However, the fact that you are arguing and asking for "refutation" proves you don't believe the confused stuff above. Because if you did, you couldn't get anybody to change their mind anyway. The state of their mind at all times would be nothing but the collocation of previous material and deterministic causes, not in any way produced by volition.

That's pretty much all the refutation needed.

That was about the shortest argument on record.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:02 pm**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 6:36 pm
Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 5:02 pm When I chose to commit a crime, or not commit a crime I make a decision. The decision is based on a nexus of causalities which include all antecedent conditions including my motivation, volition, physical and mental needs, education, socialisation, experience ad infinitem. It might be difficult for another to predict my choice. But that choice can only make sense if it is the sum of those causalities, the things that make me who I am. There are laws that might deter me, or encourage me. but it is not free in an absolute sense that I am free of the deterministic condition of the universe, the laws and cause and effect which cause my decision to be made of necessity to the conditions at that moment. It is an inescapable truth that I am determined to act thus, and in the full knowledge of the consequences and the responsibility which is wholly mine, I make the choice. Free will is illusory, such choices are determined or would be meaningless. I am that agent of determinism compatible with causality and the exercise of my will.

But apparently, God gives us free will. And about that, we have no choice, because he insists upon it. Unless you are a Calvinist, then you don't.

ANyone care to refute?
Well, "decision," "motivation," "volition," "education," "socialization," "experience"...all are cognitive and non-material phenomena.

Quite the contrary.

All of these things are clearly provably Physical.

If they are immaterial then how can they all be altered by drugs and physical injury?

If they are not "material" then how do they interact with the "material" world?

But even by your own game, they they are not "material" neither is light, heat and all other forms of energy. Yet they all have effects.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:04 pm**

I think it's a question of how much, if any, free will we have. It has been shown that many of the decisions we believe we make consciously have already been made at a deeper lever in our psyche (or whatever they call it) beforehand. It just feels like it was a conscious decision. I don't like the thought of not having any free will at all, but it seems that could be the case.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:09 pm**

Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:04 pm I think it's a question of how much, if any, free will we have. It has been shown that many of the decisions we believe we make consciously have already been made at a deeper lever in our psyche (or whatever they call it) beforehand. It just feels like it was a conscious decision. I don't like the thought of not having any free will at all, but it seems that could be the case.

But even if you are perfectly conscious of your choice and think it is made freely then there is still the question of what is causing your consciousness to be such as it is.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:11 pm**

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:02 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 6:36 pm
Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 5:02 pm When I chose to commit a crime, or not commit a crime I make a decision. The decision is based on a nexus of causalities which include all antecedent conditions including my motivation, volition, physical and mental needs, education, socialisation, experience ad infinitem. It might be difficult for another to predict my choice. But that choice can only make sense if it is the sum of those causalities, the things that make me who I am. There are laws that might deter me, or encourage me. but it is not free in an absolute sense that I am free of the deterministic condition of the universe, the laws and cause and effect which cause my decision to be made of necessity to the conditions at that moment. It is an inescapable truth that I am determined to act thus, and in the full knowledge of the consequences and the responsibility which is wholly mine, I make the choice. Free will is illusory, such choices are determined or would be meaningless. I am that agent of determinism compatible with causality and the exercise of my will.

But apparently, God gives us free will. And about that, we have no choice, because he insists upon it. Unless you are a Calvinist, then you don't.

ANyone care to refute?
Well, "decision," "motivation," "volition," "education," "socialization," "experience"...all are cognitive and non-material phenomena.
Quite the contrary.

All of these things are clearly provably Physical.

Then describe their physical properties: how much do they weigh, or what is their temperature, or how many can you fit in a Volkswagen?

They're manifestly NOT physical, because they lack every property, such as density, or mass, or occupying space, that characterize physical things. You need to remove all of them from your account, if you wanted to be determinist, and redescribe all of them in terms of mere physics.

If they are material then how can they all be altered by drugs and physical injury?

That last sentence doesn't even makes sense: I believe you were trying to say, "If they are NOT material..."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlati ... _causation.

And when you're done, the other problem still remains: you're asking people who (as a determinist) you must believe cannot change their minds, especially for cognitive reasons, to change their minds in order to believe in determinism. But according to determinism, what they are, at any given moment, is entirely a product of prior physical causes, and absolutely nothing but those. So they can't believe you. "Believing" is itself just a physical, cause-effect relation, entirely unrelated to the rational integrity of any argument offered...according to determinism.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:14 pm**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:11 pm "Believing" is itself just a physical, cause-effect relation, entirely unrelated to the rational integrity of any argument offered...according to determinism.

If they are immaterial then how can they all be altered by drugs and physical injury?

If they are not "material" then how do they interact with the "material" world?

But even by your own game, they they are not "material" neither is light, heat and all other forms of energy. Yet they all have effects.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:22 pm**

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:09 pm
Harbal wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:04 pm I think it's a question of how much, if any, free will we have. It has been shown that many of the decisions we believe we make consciously have already been made at a deeper lever in our psyche (or whatever they call it) beforehand. It just feels like it was a conscious decision. I don't like the thought of not having any free will at all, but it seems that could be the case.
But even if you are perfectly conscious of your choice and think it is made freely then there is still the question of what is causing your consciousness to be such as it is.

Yes, I see what you mean, but I can't imagine where to start looking for the answer to that question. I believe we are still nowhere near figuring out what consciousness actually is, and how it comes about.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:32 pm**

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:14 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:11 pm "Believing" is itself just a physical, cause-effect relation, entirely unrelated to the rational integrity of any argument offered...according to determinism.

If they are immaterial then how can they all be altered by drugs and physical injury?

When two things correlate, that does not tell us about causality. Check the link.

If they are not "material" then how do they interact with the "material" world?

That would only be a problem if we already had convinced ourselves, without any evidence at all, that all there was in the universe were material phenomena.

But even by your own game, they they are not "material" neither is light, heat and all other forms of energy.

Actually, they are physical. Light is measurable in "lumens." Energy is measured in "joules." Both are quantifiable and physical.

In what units are "thoughts" and "consciousness" and "experience" measured?

But you're still not even mentioning the other problem: why are you arguing, since nobody can change their mind? Are you really expecting that an immaterial property called "reasons" acting on "consciousness" is going to produce a physical effect called "change" or "new belief" in a brain-state? If so, you have no deterministic account behind you on that.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:38 pm**

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 5:02 pm When I chose to commit a crime, or not commit a crime I make a decision. The decision is based on a nexus of causalities which include all antecedent conditions including my motivation, volition, physical and mental needs, education, socialisation, experience ad infinitem. It might be difficult for another to predict my choice. But that choice can only make sense if it is the sum of those causalities, the things that make me who I am. There are laws that might deter me, or encourage me. but it is not free in an absolute sense that I am free of the deterministic condition of the universe, the laws and cause and effect which cause my decision to be made of necessity to the conditions at that moment. It is an inescapable truth that I am determined to act thus, and in the full knowledge of the consequences and the responsibility which is wholly mine, I make the choice. Free will is illusory, such choices are determined or would be meaningless. I am that agent of determinism compatible with causality and the exercise of my will.

But apparently, God gives us free will. And about that, we have no choice, because he insists upon it. Unless you are a Calvinist, then you don't.

ANyone care to refute?

*yawn*

Newcomb's paradox.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2023 8:59 pm**

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:32 pm
Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:14 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:11 pm "Believing" is itself just a physical, cause-effect relation, entirely unrelated to the rational integrity of any argument offered...according to determinism.

If they are immaterial then how can they all be altered by drugs and physical injury?
When two things correlate, that does not tell us about causality. Check the link.
If they are not "material" then how do they interact with the "material" world?
That would only be a problem if we already had convinced ourselves, without any evidence at all, that all there was in the universe were material phenomena.

But even by your own game, they they are not "material" neither is light, heat and all other forms of energy.
Actually, they are physical. Light is measurable in "lumens." Energy is measured in "joules." Both are quantifiable and physical.

In what units are "thoughts" and "consciousness" and "experience" measured?

But you're still not even mentioning the other problem: why are you arguing, since nobody can change their mind? Are you really expecting that an immaterial property called "reasons" acting on "consciousness" is going to produce a physical effect called "change" or "new belief" in a brain-state? If so, you have no deterministic account behind you on that.

Why do you not answer the questions like an honest person?
The reason is that you cannot.
I can change your consciousness with a cricket bat; alter your perception with a drug, and change your mind by spooning out a part of your brain.
A good anesthetist can control your consciousness, yet you have no account of what is "immaterial". I offer you science and you have magic.
Even if there are such things as immaterial things, they would still be caused by something.
And whether or not you make a choice with the immaterial you still have to operate in the real world.
You have no case.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2023 9:01 pm**

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:38 pm
Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 5:02 pm When I chose to commit a crime, or not commit a crime I make a decision. The decision is based on a nexus of causalities which include all antecedent conditions including my motivation, volition, physical and mental needs, education, socialisation, experience ad infinitem. It might be difficult for another to predict my choice. But that choice can only make sense if it is the sum of those causalities, the things that make me who I am. There are laws that might deter me, or encourage me. but it is not free in an absolute sense that I am free of the deterministic condition of the universe, the laws and cause and effect which cause my decision to be made of necessity to the conditions at that moment. It is an inescapable truth that I am determined to act thus, and in the full knowledge of the consequences and the responsibility which is wholly mine, I make the choice. Free will is illusory, such choices are determined or would be meaningless. I am that agent of determinism compatible with causality and the exercise of my will.

But apparently, God gives us free will. And about that, we have no choice, because he insists upon it. Unless you are a Calvinist, then you don't.

ANyone care to refute?
*yawn*

Newcomb's paradox.

Irrelevant
This is why I have you on ignore.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2023 9:08 pm**

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 9:01 pm
Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:38 pm
Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 5:02 pm When I chose to commit a crime, or not commit a crime I make a decision. The decision is based on a nexus of causalities which include all antecedent conditions including my motivation, volition, physical and mental needs, education, socialisation, experience ad infinitem. It might be difficult for another to predict my choice. But that choice can only make sense if it is the sum of those causalities, the things that make me who I am. There are laws that might deter me, or encourage me. but it is not free in an absolute sense that I am free of the deterministic condition of the universe, the laws and cause and effect which cause my decision to be made of necessity to the conditions at that moment. It is an inescapable truth that I am determined to act thus, and in the full knowledge of the consequences and the responsibility which is wholly mine, I make the choice. Free will is illusory, such choices are determined or would be meaningless. I am that agent of determinism compatible with causality and the exercise of my will.

But apparently, God gives us free will. And about that, we have no choice, because he insists upon it. Unless you are a Calvinist, then you don't.

ANyone care to refute?
*yawn*

Newcomb's paradox.
Irrelevant
This is why I have you on ignore.

You can't even work an ignore list - I doubt you posess the intellect the understand the relevance,

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2023 9:18 pm**

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 9:08 pm
Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 9:01 pm
Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 7:38 pm
*yawn*

Newcomb's paradox.
Irrelevant
This is why I have you on ignore.
You can't even work an ignore list - I doubt you posess the intellect the understand the relevance,

Since I began the thread I thought it only fair to read your "contribution".
If you think you have an argument with this paradox, then please feel free to make it.
But you can hardly expect me to waste my time one a one-line response.

Posted: **Sat Jun 17, 2023 9:31 pm**

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 9:18 pm
Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 9:08 pm
Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Jun 17, 2023 9:01 pm
Irrelevant
This is why I have you on ignore.
You can't even work an ignore list - I doubt you posess the intellect the understand the relevance,
Since I began the thread I thought it only fair to read your "contribution".
If you think you have an argument with this paradox, then please feel free to make it.
But you can hardly expect me to waste my time one a one-line response.

You want me to waste time writing an essay when a one-line response suffices to reject your entire line of reasoning?!?

That's fucking stupid.

If you don't want read then don't read. Nobody's going to force you to be less ignorant.

Philosophy Now Forum

Free will is wholly deterministic

Free will is wholly deterministic

Re: Free will is wholly deterministic

Re: Free will is wholly deterministic

Re: Free will is wholly deterministic

Re: Free will is wholly deterministic

Re: Free will is wholly deterministic

Re: Free will is wholly deterministic

Re: Free will is wholly deterministic

Re: Free will is wholly deterministic

Re: Free will is wholly deterministic

Re: Free will is wholly deterministic

Re: Free will is wholly deterministic

Re: Free will is wholly deterministic

Re: Free will is wholly deterministic

Re: Free will is wholly deterministic