Is Epiphenomenalism Irrational?

[seer]

Of course

That is not the point Tass, you already agree that the quantum world is not deterministic, and the quantum world is the basis for all matter and energy. So though we see rather mundane cause and effect with larger objects that is not what is happening at the micro level.



Right, useless because it does not agree with you! Oh the irony...



No Tass, your main argument against LFW is that we live in a deterministic universe - and that claim is not true.

[JimL]

That is not the point Tass, you already agree that the quantum world is not deterministic, and the quantum world is the basis for all matter and energy. So though we see rather mundane cause and effect with larger objects that is not what is happening at the micro level.





Right, useless because it does not agree with you! Oh the irony...





No Tass, your main argument against LFW is that we live in a deterministic universe - and that claim is not true.

Seer, the universe being random isn't any better an argument for free will. Whether determined or random, you would still be caught in the web of causation.

[seer]

Seer, the universe being random isn't any better an argument for free will. Whether determined or random, you would still be caught in the web of causation.

Unless it opens the door for the agent having the real ability to decide between options. That one option is not determined.

[Tassman]

That is not the point Tass, you already agree that the quantum world is not deterministic, and the quantum world is the basis for all matter and energy. So though we see rather mundane cause and effect with larger objects that is not what is happening at the micro level.

Right, useless because it does not agree with you! Oh the irony...

No Tass, your main argument against LFW is that we live in a deterministic universe - and that claim is not true.

[JimL]

Unless it opens the door for the agent having the real ability to decide between options. That one option is not determined.

Well, that is an hypothesis for which you provide no evidence. Its basically wishfull thinking. Also, and this is the thing that you are confusing about the micro nature of the physical world, the indeterminate label some put on it has nothing to do with the physics, it has to do with our own inability to determine. The micro world is no less determined according to physics than is the macro world, Schroedingers equation is completely deterministic, the uncertainty lies in our inability to observe it at the micro level. This is due, not to the random nature of the micro world, but rather it is due to our inability to observe a microscopic particles location and its velocity at the same time.

[seer]

Well, that is an hypothesis for which you provide no evidence. Its basically wishfull thinking.

So you are a determinist now? And the evidence is my personal experience and yours...

Also, and this is the thing that you are confusing about the micro nature of the physical world, the indeterminate label some put on it has nothing to do with the physics, it has to do with our own inability to determine. The micro world is no less determined according to physics than is the macro world, Schroedingers equation is completely deterministic, the uncertainty lies in our inability to observe it at the micro level. This is due, not to the random nature of the micro world, but rather it is due to our inability to observe a microscopic particles location and its velocity at the same time.

No, that is not correct, again:

Indeterminism is the concept that events (certain events, or events of certain types) are not caused, or not caused deterministically (cf. causality) by prior events. It is the opposite of determinism and related to chance. It is highly relevant to the philosophical problem of free will, particularly in the form of metaphysical libertarianism.

In science, most specifically quantum theory in physics, indeterminism is the belief that no event is certain and the entire outcome of anything is a probability. The Heisenberg uncertainty relations and the "Born rule", proposed by Max Born, are often starting points in support of the indeterministic nature of the universe.[1] Indeterminism is also asserted by Sir Arthur Eddington, and Murray Gell-Mann. Indeterminism has been promoted by the French biologist Jacques Monod's essay "Chance and Necessity". The physicist-chemist Ilya Prigogine argued for indeterminism in complex systems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indeterminism

[seer]

[Tassman]

illogical

[seer]

illogical

You already agree in the other thread that you can not make a deductive argument to support your position. And you have no way of knowing when your brain is deceiving you or not. Including the idea that your above quote has anything to do with reality or fact.

Again, the universe is not deterministic.

[The Thinker]

Again, the universe is not deterministic.

Really? Where is your evidence for this?

[The Thinker]

So you are a determinist now? And the evidence is my personal experience and yours...

Seer, you already know that personal experience is not evidence for LFW. You already know that if a device was planted in your brain that allowed me to control your thoughts or actions, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference whether these thoughts originated in your brain independently of this device or not. So now you're just spouting lies once again.

No, that is not correct, again:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indeterminism

Measurement is probabilistic. So QM does not show indeterminism.

[Tassman]

You already agree in the other thread that you can not make a deductive argument to support your position. And you have no way of knowing when your brain is deceiving you or not. Including the idea that your above quote has anything to do with reality or fact.

illogical, capricious and inscrutable universe wherein one could make no predictions based upon the facts of nature and where scientific endeavour would be impossible.

Again, the universe is not deterministic.

Nonsense! Determinism applies at the macroscopic level, which is where we function, otherwise all travel and space travel could not be undertaken. This does not mean quantum mechanics does not apply to macro world at all, but merely that the uncertainties involved are far too small to be observed or make an impact

[JimL]

So you are a determinist now?

Not completely. But like Tass has been saying, you need to show where within the cause and effect chain free will emerges. You state unequivalically that it does and your only evidence for that stance is >

"And the evidence is my personal experience and yours..."

We all feel as though we have free will, but science is based upon observation of the physical world, not on our feelings.

No, that is not correct, again:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indeterminism

Indeterminism in this sense does not support your contention of free will. All that does is to tell us that we have no idea what the future state of a system will be. Your actions would still be determined by antecedent causes even if the atecedent causes are themselves random. So, the argument for indeterminism is not in itself an argument that in any way supports free will.

[seer]

We all feel as though we have free will, but science is based upon observation of the physical world, not on our feelings.

And science is never wrong Jim, or so incomplete that it gets wrong answers? And remember, I'm not a materialist so it is not necessary for me to reduce all phenomenon to cause and effect as we understand it. Though I would say that our will and intellect breaks the deterministic chain - That I am the first cause of the decisions I make. Like Joel has been talking about. In any case I will go to my grave believing that I am responsible for my moral choices, not that I was a slave to antecedent causes.

[Tassman]

And science is never wrong Jim, or so incomplete that it gets wrong answers?

And remember, I'm not a materialist so it is not necessary for me to reduce all phenomenon to cause and effect as we understand it.

unless of course you want to be taken seriously.

Though I would say that our will and intellect breaks the deterministic chain - That I am the first cause of the decisions I make.

HOW can this possibly be so

Like Joel has been talking about. In any case I will go to my grave believing that I am responsible for my moral choices,

illusionnothing of the pages and pages and pages of discussion on this subject?

not that I was a slave to antecedent causes.

Indeed! You're a slave to your logically incoherent, unevidenced religious presuppositions.