- Joined
- Mar 31, 2009
- Messages
- 4,527
- Reaction score
- 0
For free will to exist uncaused actions would have to be possible. It's a simple matter for me. Determinism is the truth because uncaused actions aren't real.
Your cerebral cortex numbskull.
For free will to exist uncaused actions would have to be possible. It's a simple matter for me. Determinism is the truth because uncaused actions aren't real.
LucasWithLidOff is making a good point that all you determinists are ignoring.
If there is no free will and we have no choice in what we believe in, then every theory we believe is right could be entirely wrong and we'd have no choice to believe it otherwise because we have no free will. So all the evidence that points to free will being an illusion would indeed be unverifiable because we do not contain the cognitive ability to decipher what is right or wrong.
Who says we're ignoring it? It doesn't really invalidate the argument so much as bring up some interesting implications.
It makes the debate futile
That sounds so weird, I'm not even sure what you're trying to say.LucasWithLidOff is making a good point that all you determinists are ignoring.
If there is no free will and we have no choice in what we believe in, then every theory we believe is right could be entirely wrong and we'd have no choice to believe it otherwise because we have no free will. So all the evidence that points to free will being an illusion would indeed be unverifiable because we do not contain the cognitive ability to decipher what is right or wrong.
That sounds so weird, I'm not even sure what you're trying to say.
Old theories are discarded and new ones created all the time due to receiving new information. We change our minds constantly. Doesn't mean we have free will. It's just us reacting to the environment.
It means we are incapable of knowing whether information is true or not. If we have no choice in what we accept to be true, then even false things can be accepted as true without being able to realize it. Logical deduction and reasoning are non existent since you need to be in control of what you are reasoning to come to a real conclusion.
How do you figure? It still seems to me like I'm choosing one theory over the other. Moreover, one theory might even be more true than the other.
All we're saying is that the factors that led to the choosing of that option were set from the beginning. I'm still making the "choice" (insofar as that can be said) for the same reason, my judgement and inferences remain the same, but the entire circumstance was created by contingent factors that were ultimately not under my control.
If you have no control over your thoughts then how do you know that "truth" is not an illusion.
To say free will is an illusion is to say consciousness is an illusion.
Thus the conscious reasoning that makes you believe something is merely an illusion as well.
So if one cannot reason, then how can one say that they logically arrive to the truth.
Here is my 185
You can choose to not shit and die
You can choose to not shit and die