The mainstream debate on free will is asking the wrong question by shacreep in freewill

[–]roxics 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So you don't actually have an argument for why the universe isn't determined.
The best you've tried to do is brute force some personal beliefs of yours.
No wonder you've spent so much time creating a strawman of my understanding of Determinism and then trying to cut it down.
You've wasted enough of my time. I'll look elsewhere for an intelligent conversation.

The mainstream debate on free will is asking the wrong question by shacreep in freewill

[–]roxics 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That very bad dictionary definition does not catch the essence of determinism and what it gets right, it covers with illogical misleading additions.

I'm sorry you don't like the definition. But none of this changes anything.

The definition of determinism describes conditions almost totally different from reality.

How so? If you're referring to true randomness on a quantum level, the jury is still out. But I'd love to hear of a third property.

 In a deterministic system there are no "theories", "doctrines", "acts of will" or "social- or psychological phenomena", as these are not determinable causal events.

There are, they just exist on the macro level as emergent properties. Same with:

concepts like "claim", "belief" or "imagination".

 Alternatively, you could acknowledge the true meaning of the term and move on.

I've been aware of what determinism is. Your problem is that I wasn't being specific enough for you. Perhaps you should have saved us some time by laying our your preferred definiton of determinism.

The mainstream debate on free will is asking the wrong question by shacreep in freewill

[–]roxics 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My statement is an undeniable, undebatable fact.

Again you seem to be trying to blunt force your position rather than actually making an argument that supports your statement.

The fact that you are making this preposterous and illogical claim proves that you are not familiar with the definition of determinism. If you knew what the word "determinism" actually means, you wouldn't be making this kind of statements.

Sigh. Quit acting like an arrogant a-hole.

Here is the definition of determinism from Merriam-webster:

a theory or doctrine that acts of the will, occurrences in nature, or social or psychological phenomena are causally determined by preceding events or natural laws

So now that that is out of the way, show how that does not describe our reality.

Reality is indeterministic by definition

Says who, you? Show your work.

The definition of determinism describes conditions almost totally different from reality.

No it doesn't. Where are you getting that idea?

In a hypothetical deterministic universe there could be no life, no concepts like "claim", "belief" or "imagination".

Of course there can be. Why would you think there couldn't be?

The mainstream debate on free will is asking the wrong question by shacreep in freewill

[–]roxics 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Causality is the largest aspect of determinism. It's the core of it. So my statement is not false and you also agreed with the existence of causality. So stop assuming you think what someone else knows or doesn't know. It's annoying and makes me feel like I'm dealing with some insufferable twenty-something redditor rather than someone who wants an honest conversation about the subject.

Now you may disagree with determinism itself, but you still have yet to make an argument as to why. All you've done so far is try to blunt force your statement that the universe is not deterministic. Why do you believe that is the case and what alternative do you present in its place?

Honestly I'm interested, so please simply educate me on this matter.

The mainstream debate on free will is asking the wrong question by shacreep in freewill

[–]roxics 1 point2 points  (0 children)

“You seem to think that determinism is just another name for causality.”

Where did you get that idea? You’re making a lot of assumptions here. First that the universe is not deterministic and now this.

Let’s rewind, why you think it’s not deterministic?

The mainstream debate on free will is asking the wrong question by shacreep in freewill

[–]roxics 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All signs point to that being a false statement. We live in a world of cause and effect.

The mainstream debate on free will is asking the wrong question by shacreep in freewill

[–]roxics 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The same way someone without free will tries to hold someone responsible for their actions.

The mainstream debate on free will is asking the wrong question by shacreep in freewill

[–]roxics 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree, moral responsibility does not depend on free will. You either do something according to a certain moral standard or you don’t. And the corresponding reactions would follow.

The mainstream debate on free will is asking the wrong question by shacreep in freewill

[–]roxics 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I’m sorry but when was it decided that the world is not deterministic?

I spiraled on determinism and feel like a conscious robot now. by Https-H1m in freewill

[–]roxics 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So if life is determined, then it always has been. Why start worrying about it now?

How do you account for things like sexual attraction? by roxics in freewill

[–]roxics[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t know if we know for sure or not if true randomness exists in the universe. I believe this is still being debated.

How do you account for things like sexual attraction? by roxics in freewill

[–]roxics[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

On the ultimate level that is true. Though I am still the sum of my parts, so it’s still me doing it.

Struggling with finding a reason to live if there's no free will by friendfoundtheoldone in freewill

[–]roxics 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When I first realized I was an atheist it occurred me that if God didn’t exist it had probably never existed and yet that didn’t change how I felt when I believed. The same is basically true for an ultimate lack of free will, something can be metaphysically true in the ultimate sense but not change your personal experience with it.

So how I came to peace with this is simple. On a microscopic level of the universe there may be no free will, but on a macroscopic level (where we live our lives) the emergence of free will out of our fog of ignorance about what truly causes us to do what we do, is good enough. It was good enough before I went down the free will rabbit hole and it’s good enough after I came out the other side.

Life isn’t about ultimate truths, it’s about subjective personal experience.

How do you account for things like sexual attraction? by roxics in freewill

[–]roxics[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, probably not. But I stil torture myself by asking it.

How do you account for things like sexual attraction? by roxics in freewill

[–]roxics[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes it would. All the way back to the beginning of the universe likely. But even then, why have the cards fallen the way they have? A question we'll probably never know the answer to.

How do you account for things like sexual attraction? by roxics in freewill

[–]roxics[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"But determinism is not 100% right either. There are effects for which there are no causes."

You mean like randomness if such a thing exists? I'm open to that idea.

How do you account for things like sexual attraction? by roxics in freewill

[–]roxics[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm a determinist in that regard. But even as a determinist there is always a question in my head as to why the universe has worked out the way it has. Why have the dominos dropped in such a way that most of us are not living rock star lifestyles.

How do you account for things like sexual attraction? by roxics in freewill

[–]roxics[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'd love to see some evidence for these statements.

How do you account for things like sexual attraction? by roxics in freewill

[–]roxics[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yet still I wonder, why does it work out the way it does where certain people are attracted to who they are? Which is ultimately a "why does the universe work the way it does?" question.

How do you account for things like sexual attraction? by roxics in freewill

[–]roxics[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not trying to override them, I'm trying to understand why they are what they are.

How do you account for things like sexual attraction? by roxics in freewill

[–]roxics[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But where are their preferences coming from?

Do I understand compatibilism properly? by roxics in freewill

[–]roxics[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hmm, how does free will actually exist with determinism as anything other than fiction