Virtues and the individual
-
- Posts: 460
- Joined: September 12th, 2017, 6:03 pm
Re: Virtues and the individual
I think it is for some personal reason that he argues for comoatibilism.
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Virtues and the individual
Are you certain you know what free will is? I am not.
The brick is perhaps a bad example of free will as it is a reflex action. Deciding to allow the brick to hit you would be an exercise in free will. For example because you were protecting your child.
-
- Posts: 460
- Joined: September 12th, 2017, 6:03 pm
Re: Virtues and the individual
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Virtues and the individual
Free Will, like a few other topics, is better defined by what it is not than by what it is. The alternative to Free Will is Predetermination, which most can understand quite easily, without analogies etc to help the process.Maxcady10001 wrote: ↑January 3rd, 2018, 2:47 pm Yeah I know he was saying free will is ill defined, but I don't see how anyone could arrive at a better definition. Even your example of protecting your child, can you decide that you don't want your child to be harmed, or is that a reflex out of love for your child?
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Virtues and the individual
Imagine you flip a coin. Mathematically you have a 50% chance of head and 50% of tails. In other words it is purely random. However in a predetermined universe there is no such thing as randomness as cause and effect means that given the exact same circumstances you would get the exact same result. However in practice the result of the flip is practically random. There is no way to predict, in advance, if the flip would be heads or tails.
Is being practically random random enough?
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Virtues and the individual
It is matter of perspective. From the perspective of the human flipping the coin it is TRULY (not practically) random. From the perspective of an entity with superhuman calculation and observation skills, it is not random at all (assuming that predeterimination exists, which is very far from being proven).Eduk wrote: ↑January 4th, 2018, 12:51 pm I'll try to give my take.
Imagine you flip a coin. Mathematically you have a 50% chance of head and 50% of tails. In other words it is purely random. However in a predetermined universe there is no such thing as randomness as cause and effect means that given the exact same circumstances you would get the exact same result. However in practice the result of the flip is practically random. There is no way to predict, in advance, if the flip would be heads or tails.
Is being practically random random enough?
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Virtues and the individual
Well according to QM that is impossible due to the uncertainty principle. So that's one point.From the perspective of an entity with superhuman calculation and observation skills
But let us imagine that they did the impossible. Then they do this magic duplication and tell me the coin flip result in advance. Of course this would then change what I did so the result would change. So then they would have to duplicate telling me the result in the duplication, presumably infinitely. Of course if they did duplicate me perfectly, then isn't that me? So even if they got around the infinite regression they still have the problem of just moving the practical randomness into a different version of the same reality, as in it's still practically random.
- SimpleGuy
- Posts: 338
- Joined: September 11th, 2017, 12:28 pm
Re: Virtues and the individual
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Virtues and the individual
Of course QM is a descriptor we use to describe our experiences as humans, superhumans may have a different experience, or not (we can never know).Eduk wrote: ↑January 4th, 2018, 1:48 pmWell according to QM that is impossible due to the uncertainty principle. So that's one point.From the perspective of an entity with superhuman calculation and observation skills
But let us imagine that they did the impossible. Then they do this magic duplication and tell me the coin flip result in advance. Of course this would then change what I did so the result would change. So then they would have to duplicate telling me the result in the duplication, presumably infinitely. Of course if they did duplicate me perfectly, then isn't that me? So even if they got around the infinite regression they still have the problem of just moving the practical randomness into a different version of the same reality, as in it's still practically random.
The superhuman does not have to interact with you (and thus change you) they could tell a remote human observer or write their predictions/calculations/knowledge on a paper and seal it in an envelope for you to read after the fact. Since their predictions (actually knowledge) would be 100% accurate, there would be zero randomness from their perspective, if you read their "prediction" after the fact, you may believe that what was indistinguishable from true randomness to you, was in fact predetermined.
-
- Posts: 460
- Joined: September 12th, 2017, 6:03 pm
Re: Virtues and the individual
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Virtues and the individual
Very true, randomness does not equal free will, though both of these separate entities would be wiped out if there was predetermination.Maxcady10001 wrote: ↑January 4th, 2018, 3:59 pm Even if everything is random, that doesn't give anyone free will, only randomness. I don't understand why people cannot get past this whole free will thing. It was only an invention of religious people to introduce moral accountability, other than religious reasons why would anyone care about free will? It's been refuted a hundred times over and I suspect people will continue refuting it as the years go by.
-
- Posts: 460
- Joined: September 12th, 2017, 6:03 pm
Re: Virtues and the individual
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7932
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Virtues and the individual
I'm sorry, what, exactly is: "a completely random world"?Maxcady10001 wrote: ↑January 4th, 2018, 7:51 pm A completely random world would do just as well wiping out free will and moral accountability.
-
- Posts: 460
- Joined: September 12th, 2017, 6:03 pm
Re: Virtues and the individual
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Virtues and the individual
The statements that people present as unarguable fact simply boggle my mind. You were present when the first person 'invented' free will? They were religious and they told you explicitly their purpose? It's amazing how it caught on.I don't understand why people cannot get past this whole free will thing. It was only an invention of religious people to introduce moral accountability,
Kind of ignores the fact I was self aware before anyone told me I was self aware. Maybe a religious person whispered it into my ear and I forgot. What is a religious person by the way? How do I distinguish a generic religious person from anyone else?
Anyway, mind boggled.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023