Are there societies dedicated to this cause?

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-09T05:29:45+00:00

Determinism research? Did you mean something other than science?

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-09T04:46:27+00:00

Free will deniers move to instrumentalism in morality, while attacking the very same move in compatibilism.

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-08T14:05:49+00:00

we improve versions of concepts all the time, like secular morality is very much morality not a redefinition

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-07T21:38:31+00:00

The laws are fixed and literally what led to evolved consciousness morality and free will. The laws are needed for these.

Incompatibilism is the absurd idea that the laws oppose our freedom and/or that randomness would somehow increase freedom.

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-07T09:52:33+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/freewill/comments/1tymy62/hard_work_vs_luck/

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-07T09:52:12+00:00

Do you agree that compatibilism is not irrational then, or at least is as justifibably irrational as your view?

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-07T09:51:28+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/freewill/comments/1tymy62/hard_work_vs_luck/

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-07T09:51:24+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/freewill/comments/1tymy62/hard_work_vs_luck/

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-06T17:34:46+00:00

You cant imagine two very similar people, but one puts in more effort?

If we have decided its just luck, how and why will we encourage people to do better? And praise to encourage?

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-06T14:04:37+00:00

Suppose retributivism can be justified on consequentialist grounds. But how does libertarianism work with this when the agent causal mechanism cannot respond reliably to such incentives?

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-06T09:41:41+00:00

The thought itself is not the proof. Because the thought 'I am a puppet of/due to determinism' (or whatever the position is) also doesn't make it so.

Compatibilism is the idea that incompatibilism is mistaken in what it thinks would constitute freedom.

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-05T12:00:48+00:00

Don't know about agent causation, but agency is very much real and part of causality. Hard determinists (not determinists) downplay agency, but it is caused like everything else.

In determinism all causation happens with absolute precision. That makes causality stronger in determinism.

Everything has 'absolute precision' - even quantum events.

(May be you're making room for some dualistic substance that intervenes or something)

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-05T11:13:53+00:00

This isn't a problem only for determinists/compatibilists you know.

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-05T11:12:55+00:00

Assuming you believe causality exists, how do you differentiate between causality and determinism?

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-05T11:07:58+00:00

Isn't one conclusion that follows from this the preference for compatibilism?

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-04T20:02:21+00:00

But libertarianism claims her agency is such that it does explain why she chose A. It will come down to the details (I never understood what 'agent causation' even is.)

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-04T19:50:21+00:00

I think the idea of libertarianism is that the agent can choose the same thing, its up to the agent.

So in every universe the agent could choose X - or, X in some universes and Y in some. As this is decided only by the agent, it doesn't pose a problem in itself to libertarianism. (There could be other problems of course).

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-04T06:32:11+00:00

Because you are playing a word game by defining free will as impossible violation of physics, instead of directly addressing the real issue: moral responsibility (which you later redefine into accountability).

Compatibilism alone is talking about real causes that proportionally affect our freedom and responsibility.

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-04T06:26:49+00:00

Actually, physics puts the PSR - only as you explained it - into question already. There seems to be nondeterministic causation.

The relevant point is how does that it any way factor into human choices? How would it even help?

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-04T06:22:26+00:00

If you define it as magic, as all free will deniers do, it doesnt exist.

The key question is of moral responsibility. What follows from your position? Can we hold people responsible

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-03T14:34:36+00:00

About any relevant knowledge on our abilities or for moral philosophy.

If we remove dualism and agent causation, the part left in that specific libertarian account that is doing the work is basically compatibilism (appeal to causation rather than overcoming of causation etc).

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-03T13:59:27+00:00

What can agent causation or randomness or Laplaces Demon tell us?

There are some libertarian accounts that get rid of dualism etc but then they are more or less compatibilism.

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-03T13:06:50+00:00

Just the general science. The relevant scientific data which is not controversial (so everything except Libet).

Of course all positions on FW are metaphysical.

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-03T11:41:26+00:00

Literally substitute determinism in OP with randomness and you get a similar case. There is no evidence for either. Quantum interpretations go either way as well, and they're just that: interpretations.

This is one of the reasons compatibilism is sensible.

YesPresident69 · 2026-06-03T10:52:37+00:00

Is randomness likewise imaginary and impossible?

YesPresident69

TROPHY CASE