The Problem Of Evil?

[Tassman]

What is left out of your deterministic picture and how does that effect our behavior?

Compatibilism provides your answer.

More to the point, one cannot have completely undetermined Libertarian Freewill given that our decisions are demonstrably influenced by factors as previously outlined – such as genetic inheritance, social conditioning and subconscious memories.

[seer]

Compatibilism provides your answer.

More to the point, one cannot have completely undetermined Libertarian Freewill given that our decisions are demonstrably influenced by factors as previously outlined – such as genetic inheritance, social conditioning and subconscious memories.

Compatibilism is just determinism by another name. They simply redefine free will. The fact is Tass, if you are correct, everything we think do or say is predetermined by antecedent conditions and biology. You have no choice in posting the above, and you have no choice as to whether you believe it is true or not. You just spit out what you have been programmed to.

[Sparko]

Your analogy is valid. Demonstrate that the image on the tape has any volition.

The image on the tape is just a convenient tool to explain the analogy. We are not talking about the image on the tape, but the actual person doing the actual thing at the actual time. You can substitute a magic window that lets you view the actual event happening if you want.

[Sparko]

But you are evading the point that when God created you as an individual, he did so with the full knowledge (being omniscient) of exactly what you would be and do. In short, God made you that way.

He made me as a free individual knowing what I would freely do.

[Stoic]

Compatibilism is just determinism by another name. They simply redefine free will. The fact is Tass, if you are correct, everything we think do or say is predetermined by antecedent conditions and biology. You have no choice in posting the above, and you have no choice as to whether you believe it is true or not. You just spit out what you have been programmed to.

Compatibilism is not the same as determinism. One can allow that the universe could be indeterministic, and still be a compatibilist. All the compatibilist is saying is that it's not a bad thing if the universe does turn out to be deterministic.

Personally, I would prefer that the universe be deterministic. I want my decisions to be based on reasons, rather than random chance. It does look like the universe is at least somewhat indeterministic, but the amount of indeterminism doesn't really screw things up too much at our level.

[seer]

Compatibilism is not the same as determinism. One can allow that the universe could be indeterministic, and still be a compatibilist. All the compatibilist is saying is that it's not a bad thing if the universe does turn out to be deterministic.

But indeterminism does not offer any freedom of the will, just randomness.

Personally, I would prefer that the universe be deterministic. I want my decisions to be based on reasons, rather than random chance. It does look like the universe is at least somewhat indeterministic, but the amount of indeterminism doesn't really screw things up too much at our level.

But your decisions are not based on "reasons" they are predetermined by the non-rational forces of nature, which have no "reasons..."

[tabibito]

But your decisions are not based on "reasons" they are predetermined by the non-rational forces of nature, which have no "reasons..."

Which would not prevent them from generating reasons.

[seer]

Which would not prevent them from generating reasons.

Yes, it would. What do natural forces know about "reasons" or logic?

[Machinist]

Yes, it would. What do natural forces know about "reasons" or logic?

Just taking a guess here as to what answer you might get, but I would guess that the reasons Stoic is talking about are the events that came before.

Example:

what was the reason I changed jobs?

The reason is that I get better benefits.

Why does this company offer better benefits?

The reason is that they have a larger corner on the market, and are able to generate more revenue thus they are able to share it with their employees.

And so on, and so on...

[Machinist]

I suppose though that the atheists definition of "reason" here could be challenged, but it would seem that atheism is only concerned with pragmatic application:

It does look like the universe is at least somewhat indeterministic, but the amount of indeterminism doesn't really screw things up too much at our level.-Stoic

[seer]

Just taking a guess here as to what answer you might get, but I would guess that the reasons Stoic is talking about are the events that came before.

Example:

what was the reason I changed jobs?

The reason is that I get better benefits.

Why does this company offer better benefits?

The reason is that they have a larger corner on the market, and are able to generate more revenue thus they are able to share it with their employees.

And so on, and so on...

I don't disagree - the question is, why/how is such reasoning even possible if non-rational forces are the driving force.

[Stoic]

Just taking a guess here as to what answer you might get, but I would guess that the reasons Stoic is talking about are the events that came before.

Example:

what was the reason I changed jobs?

The reason is that I get better benefits.

Why does this company offer better benefits?

The reason is that they have a larger corner on the market, and are able to generate more revenue thus they are able to share it with their employees.

And so on, and so on...

Right. In order to make a good decision about how to act, I need at a minimum to be able to:

1) Understand what the world is like right now.
2) Determine how my actions will affect the course of future events.
3) Choose to act in such a way as to bring about the most desirable future.

Indeterminism will tend to make each of these steps less reliable, since it adds in a measure of randomness.

[Stoic]

But indeterminism does not offer any freedom of the will, just randomness.

I agree. That's one reason why I think determinism doesn't really give us any less free will than indeterminism.

But your decisions are not based on "reasons" they are predetermined by the non-rational forces of nature, which have no "reasons..."

My decisions are based on how the world is (which is a result of the non-rational forces of nature), and how future events will be affected by my actions (which is a result of the non-rational forces of nature), and my own opinions as to which future events are most desirable (which are a result of the non-rational forces of nature).

The inputs to the decision are all a result of the non-rational forces of nature, so that only leaves making the decision itself. You may feel that that requires something other than the non-rational forces of nature, but I don't. I look at what computers are able to do, and they are guided by the non-rational forces of nature. I don't see any reason to believe our brains are guided by any more than the non-rational forces of nature.

[Machinist]

I don't disagree - the question is, why/how is such reasoning even possible if non-rational forces are the driving force.

You dead end into Emergence... And yes, we've already covered that that is a non-answer. But that's about as good as you're going to get.

[Machinist]

I agree. That's one reason why I think determinism doesn't really give us any less free will than indeterminism.


My decisions are based on how the world is (which is a result of the non-rational forces of nature), and how future events will be affected by my actions (which is a result of the non-rational forces of nature), and my own opinions as to which future events are most desirable (which are a result of the non-rational forces of nature).

The inputs to the decision are all a result of the non-rational forces of nature, so that only leaves making the decision itself. You may feel that that requires something other than the non-rational forces of nature, but I don't. I look at what computers are able to do, and they are guided by the non-rational forces of nature. I don't see any reason to believe our brains are guided by any more than the non-rational forces of nature.

It's like there really is no agency here at all. There is no "I" that is not a product of non rational forces.

I don't like it one bit.