Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Wrong again. No rainbow because I wanted QvQ to know that you were wrong. Determinism doesn't equate to the predictability. You've had that explained to you very many times....a question of whether or not our decisions are perfectly predictable based on past conditions...
I see, you are theoretical. I have to check things out in objective reality.Someone arguing determinism must deny themselves any semblance of agency, or else they are being inconsistent in their claim of determinism.
Your repetition of assertions isn't a failing on my part, you wouldn't need to repeat them if you advanced the discussion by responding to my criticisims rather than just repetitively asserting your semantic games.From now on in, when you see the little rainbow on your post it'll me be saying, yeah - I read it but it's not worth my time responding to it. For all sorts of reasons which I don't want to regurgitate yet again. So it'll be 'optimistic' in that I'm optimistic that your next post will be worth responding to. Feel free to use it yourself in that manner. It'll save us so much time...
Your reasons cannot be anything but yours. They're all 'personal'. All you're doing is saying that you choose something because it's your preference. Which I've been telling you all along. And then simply saying 'Hey, that's free will'.So you're asserting that a decision made for completely personal reasons isn't a free will decision. By 'personal' I mean reasons that are mine and mine alone. If they're my reasons, then they're my choices, and if they're my choices, then it's free will.
Not being able to predict the future does not mean it's not deterministic.However if the future cannot be prerdicted by the past then there is either random or free will involved
You seem to be using terms in a way that doesn't reflect how they are used, and it's not a matter of theoretical description as I make no sweeping claims of understanding how it operates, merely that I know I have free will because I exercise it. I don't make extravagent claims about objective reality, as if somehow I have it figured out.I see, you are theoretical. I have to check things out in objective reality.
So
That was my question earlier.
Whether the person was the agent or merely predetermined by fate?
There is too narrow a field for the person to be an agent (the umbrella).
However, if the murderers of ZaZa are predetermined by fate...
Free will Or determinism does not match any objective reality I can model.
In a way, determinism is simply there is a past behind every future.
However if the future cannot be prerdicted by the past then there is either random or free will involved
And free will is an illusion because of the present binding the agent to a very small avenue of action.
Ok, but the future having a past cannot predict the past either. There is not necessarily a relationship between an atom which is a X point of its orbit and Y point of its orbit. There is a path that can be determined but the point X did not cause point Y.Not being able to predict the future does not mean it's not deterministic.
There is a possibility. But your choices are so limted by the points that @Bradskii made that you can't separate out free will from determined by external circumstances.It simply means that for any given choice, until a choice has been made there is a real possibiility of choosing any of the available options.
The reasons why you have a 'personal' preference are due to antecedent conditions that you cannot control.
It depends on how we understand "determined" in the statement "determined by past events", because the question is whether or not the decision is caused by the past or if the past just provides us with the context of the decision. This distinction is necessary because under determinism it is a direct cause and effect result rather than an intentional action. The bat striking the ball gives the ball its trajectory. So are our choices like that, or do we have the capacity to intentionally decide how we will act, though that capacity may be limited?There is a possibility. But your choices are so limted by the points that @Bradskii made that you can't separate out free will from determined by external circumstances.
All our yesterdays have lighted fools the way to dusty death
That means all the choice to have soup for supper was the cause of the dishes needing to be washed which I decided to leave till later which was the cause of my not missing the start of that tv progams.
All of those were my free will decisions, but determined by my last free will decision
So under the definition in the OP, not free will
I presume that you mean that you can't determine a prior cause. It's not something I've considered whether it is theoretically impossible to know all determinant causes. But that there are causes for the every event is a given. It's even the basis for the cosmological argument.Ok, but the future having a past cannot predict the past either.
Agreed.That means the choice to have soup for supper was the cause of the dishes needing to be washed which I decided to leave till later which was the cause of my not missing the start of that tv progams and the cause of my doing the dishes later.
All of those were my free will decisions, but determined by chain of cuase and effect free will decisions
So under the definition in the OP, not free will
Quite possibly. I'd suggest that consciousness isn't a 'thing' in itself but a process. Just as life is. But...you still make choices for reasons.Correct, but I'm asserting that consciousness and its concomitant will are both emergent phenomena...
It's not a given that every event has a cause, in fact what even constitutes a cause requires definitions before the idea can be evaluated at all. It is trivially true that under causal determinism free will is impossible and so any experience of it must be an illusion, but if you intend to argue that free will is an illusion you can't begin with an assumption of causal determinism. You take a model as if it is self-evident, and then ignore the contradictory experience to that model and insist that its our direct experiences that are wrong and not that the conceptual model is flawed in some way.I presume that you mean that you can't determine a prior cause. It's not something I've considered whether it is theoretically impossible to know all determinant causes. But that there are causes for the every event is a given. It's even the basis for the cosmological argument.
But...you still make choices for reasons.
It's impossible to know all the antecdedent conditions. But it's ridiculously easy to point to some. If not the majority of the obvious ones.Again, I agree. But I'm asserting that the emergence of consciousness relegates those reasons to more of a role of correlation than one of direct causation. So you'll always be able to find a relationship between the antecedent conditions and the outcome... it's as inevitable as preference is... and from our perspective that correlation will be indistinguishable from causation. But the ultimate cause is one that's internal to, and concomitant with consciousness.
The Free Will -Determinism threads abound and it always comes down to these two positionsI presume that you mean that you can't determine a prior cause. It's not something I've considered whether it is theoretically impossible to know all determinant causes. But that there are causes for the every event is a given. It's even the basis for the cosmological argument.
It wasn't 'an internal cause' making decisions for no reason. There were reasons. Obvious ones. We can list them.
If a sequence is not determined then it has no cause. Likewise if an event is not determined then it has no cause. If it has no cause then it is arbitrary. Random, if you like. Which obviously does not involve free will. If it is determined, then by definition there is no free will.Refutation of Usual Argument #2 Determined
2) The future has a past but the past does not determine the future, then it is not determined.
It is merely one thing follows another. There isn't any cause to wash or not wash the dishes, instead watching TV.
Not doing the dishes did not cause me to watch TV. I just happened to wander by the TV and sat down.
You see? It was a chain of events but it was not determined by causes.
So no, a sequence is not determined unless caused.
I mean it wasn't a decision that you made. Separate the mind from the body. Body is external. Mind internal.Of course it was 'an internal cause'. Every decision that you've ever made has had an internal cause.
It actually does. It's the way the molecules are formed in the coffee that triggers your senses of taste and smell. Those sense receptors will send signals to various parts of your brain and your body will tell you 'Yeah, that's good. Go for it' or 'Yikes, no. Give that a miss'. You don't decide that.That's something that you've failed to recognize from the very beginning. If you choose coffee over Earl Grey it's because you like coffee more than Earl Grey, and "liking coffee" exists internal to you and absolutely nowhere else. It certainly doesn't exist in the coffee.
If an event is not caused, it is not determined.If a sequence is not determined then it has no cause. Likewise if an event is not determined then it has no cause. If it has no cause then it is arbitrary. Random, if you like. Which obviously does not involve free will. If it is determined, then by definition there is no free will.
I mean it wasn't a decision that you made. Separate the mind from the body. Body is external. Mind internal.
It actually does. It's the way the molecules are formed in the coffee that triggers your senses of taste and smell. Those sense receptors will send signals to various parts of your brain and your body will tell you 'Yeah, that's good. Go for it' or 'Yikes, no. Give that a miss'. You don't decide that.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?