Non-theistic Moral Realism

[Tassman]

Tass, yes or no, is every thing we think do or say determined? Straight answer please.

Actually Len made a good argument for free will being coherent, even Thinker agreed that his position was coherent. And since, according to you, our free will is an illusion, then yes we are being determined by the forces of nature towards Nationalism or tribalism. We can not do otherwise.

[Tassman]

Ok, then what else is in the mind?

"Mind" is what the brain is doing. You are what the brain is doing.

[seer]

Again, if you are correct then if we are presently moving towards Nationalism in the West then it is only because we are determined to.

[shunyadragon]

Again, if you are correct then if we are presently moving towards Nationalism in the West then it is only because we are determined to.

Nationalism exists in the evolution of human cultures an societies, because it is functional in providing a consistent cooperative sense of community for nations. It is apparent that not all cultures and societies have moved toward nationalism, therefore it is not rigidly mechanically deterministic. Nationalism is the most likely outcome in evolution of cultures and societies, but it is not the only possible outcome. You consistently misrepresent determinism. In the history of humanity down to the life of the individual there is always a range possibilities, outcomes, and decisions, but there are limits as what the decisions and outcomes will be, and this is determinism.

[Tassman]

Again, if you are correct then if we are presently moving towards Nationalism in the West then it is only because we are determined to.

Your underlying objection seems to be that 'determinism' can't be true because you don't like the implications of it. But, if you do not accept that 'determinism' is the only logically coherent option, you need to justify your logically incoherent 'libertarian free-will' alternative. Waiting!

[seer]

Your underlying objection seems to be that 'determinism' can't be true because you don't like the implications of it. But, if you do not accept that 'determinism' is the only logically coherent option, you need to justify your logically incoherent 'libertarian free-will' alternative. Waiting!

No Tass, my underlying objection is that if determinism is true we have zero control. All our beliefs and thoughts are determined, true or not, right or wrong. There is no freedom of thought. You believe what the natural non-rational forces dictate that you believe. Then there is your feigned moral outrage - you act like tribalism or Nationalism or deeply held religious beliefs are somehow bad things. Well no, they are neither good or bad, right or wrong - they just are. With no more real moral significance than a fly pooping on your food. It is all just nature in motion.

[shunyadragon]

No Tass, my underlying objection is that if determinism is true we have zero control. All our beliefs and thoughts are determined, true or not, right or wrong. There is no freedom of thought. You believe what the natural non-rational forces dictate that you believe. Then there is your feigned moral outrage - you act like tribalism or Nationalism or deeply held religious beliefs are somehow bad things. Well no, they are neither good or bad, right or wrong - they just are. With no more real moral significance than a fly pooping on your food. It is all just nature in motion.

Here as in the past you are incoherently misrepresenting determinism in a very foolish wrong headed way. Determinism does not mean humans 'have zero control.

[seer]

Here as in the past you are incoherently misrepresenting determinism in a very foolish wrong headed way. Determinism does not mean humans 'have zero control.

Really? Of course it does. You can not do other than what the forces of nature dictate that you do.

philosophy
a : 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

Do you have a different definition?

[shunyadragon]

Really? Of course it does. You can not do other than what the forces of nature dictate that you do.



Do you have a different definition?

The definitin is too simplistic and incomplete.

In determinism there are always multiple possible decisions, and outcomes of events that humans may choose within the constraints of determinism. There different views within determinism, and it is not the same as Fatalism.

An interesting point to consider; Theists may believe in 'Determinism' in that they believe God is the Creator and agent of Determinism. The degree of determinism indeed varies among Theists, from rigid Fatalism to varying degrees of Free Will.

The secular humanist views the ultimate agent of determinism as Natural Laws.

[seer]

In determinism there are always multiple possible decisions, and outcomes of events that humans may choose within the constraints of determinism.

But every decision and outcome is still determined. But if you have a different definition for determinism please link it. I will be waiting...

[shunyadragon]

But every decision and outcome is still determined. But if you have a different definition for determinism please link it. I will be waiting...

It is not a matter of definition but differences within the philosophical views of determinism. You view is just to simplistic and narrow and does not consider the alternatives concerning the nature of determinism from the human perspective.



You have not responded to the problem of concepts of determinism in Theistic views.

[seer]

It is not a matter of definition but differences within the philosophical views of determinism. You view is just to simplistic and narrow and does not consider the alternatives concerning the nature of determinism from the human perspective.

From your link:

Causal determinism is, roughly speaking, the idea that every event is necessitated by antecedent events and conditions together with the laws of nature. The idea is ancient, but first became subject to clarification and mathematical analysis in the eighteenth century. Determinism is deeply connected with our understanding of the physical sciences and their explanatory ambitions, on the one hand, and with our views about human free action on the other. In both of these general areas there is no agreement over whether determinism is true (or even whether it can be known true or false), and what the import for human agency would be in either case.

Do you deny that every event is necessitated by antecedent events and conditions together with the laws of nature?

[shunyadragon]

From your link:



Do you deny that every event is necessitated by antecedent events and conditions together with the laws of nature?

Again, too simplistic a front loaded question as usual. The determination of the outcome of any event necessitated by antecedent events and conditions together with the laws of nature may and most often does have multiple outcomes, and some these different outcomes may be determined by human decisions, and the variation of the possibilities is definitely limited by the natural outcome of events beyond human control.

A selective biased citation of the reference does not improve your argument.

Again, you have failed to respond to the problem of the Theist views of various forms of determinism, , and by the way scriptural reference that imply a rigid determinism and indeed a fatalism.

[seer]

Again, too simplistic a front loaded question as usual. The determination of the outcome of any event necessitated by antecedent events and conditions together with the laws of nature may and most often does have multiple outcomes, and some these different outcomes may be determined by human decisions, and the variation of the possibilities of the natural outcome of events beyond human control.

Shuny are human decisions necessitated by antecedent events and conditions? No matter the outcome?

[shunyadragon]

Shuny are human decisions necessitated by antecedent events and conditions? No matter the outcome?

True, but again there is always the possibility of multiple decisions and outcomes. The outcome is the issue concerning the chain of events. As usual your presenting an incoherent argument.

Again, you have failed to respond to the problem of the Theist views of various forms of determinism, , and by the way scriptural reference that imply a rigid determinism and indeed a fatalism.