Announcement

Collapse

Philosophy 201 Guidelines

Cogito ergo sum

Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Non-theistic Moral Realism

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
    False concerning determinism, by definition it does not necessarily disallow possible choices in any given situation based on anticedent chains of events or situations. There are of course variations in the philosophical view of determinism. I prefer compatibilism which is more flexible by definition. Seer rejects both as determinism and without choice. Neither proposes a robotic human world without possible choices, but those limited possible choices are determined by anticedent events, circumstances, and the laws of Nature.

    Source: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/determinism-causal/#DetHumAct


    Traditionally determinism has been given various, usually imprecise definitions. This is only problematic if one is investigating determinism in a specific, well-defined theoretical context; but it is important to avoid certain major errors of definition. In order to get started we can begin with a loose and (nearly) all-encompassing definition as follows:

    Determinism: The world is governed by (or is under the sway of) determinism if and only if, given a specified way things are at a time t, the way things go thereafter is fixed as a matter of natural law.

    © Copyright Original Source



    Beyond this simple definition there are various philosophies that have evolved out of determinism.

    Compatabilism, which came from the basic assumption determinism of natural law may be considered an alternate view where determinism based on natural law exists, but variations in the outcomes, and the decision making process has more room for the concept of alternative outcomes, which I argue for, better explains the possible choices of gender identity, and sexual orientation where libertarian free will fails.
    Okay, but you do see i hope that this concept of determinism that you are espousing, i.e. compatibilism, assumes the existence of a mind, or soul, that is separated from, or independent of, the physical body, the latter being determined, but the former being free. For one thing, as I see it, that is a contradiction in that the mind/soul, even if free, could not control the physical body, not only because of the material/immaterial argument, but also because the physical body itself would be determined and so couldn't also be controlled. If determinism is true therefore, then it must be true of both body and mind even in the case of dualism. So I'm not seeing where compatabilism could work for you as a theory that fits together with determinism.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by JimL View Post
      Okay, but you do see i hope that this concept of determinism that you are espousing, i.e. compatibilism, assumes the existence of a mind, or soul, that is separated from, or independent of, the physical body, the latter being determined, but the former being free. For one thing, as I see it, that is a contradiction in that the mind/soul, even if free, could not control the physical body, not only because of the material/immaterial argument, but also because the physical body itself would be determined and so couldn't also be controlled. If determinism is true therefore, then it must be true of both body and mind even in the case of dualism. So I'm not seeing where compatabilism could work for you as a theory that fits together with determinism.
      In terms my view of determinism and my preference compatibilism, I am not making any metaphysical assumptions concerning the existence of a mind, or soul, that is separated from, or independent of the physical body. I am basing my view on what I believe concerning the nature of the is reflected by the evidence.

      My faith, Baha'i supports the belief that humans are capable of free will concerning human decisions concerning moral and ethical issues dependent on issues whether natural law apply on the influences the decision making process. The problem is natural law influences such factors as genetics, which can limit free will decisions like those concerning sexual gender, and homosexual versus heterosexual orientation. From the Baha'i perspective taking into consideration the influence of natural law compatibilism is the best descriptive nature of free will considering the real observation objective evidence concerning free will of humans.
      Last edited by shunyadragon; 03-22-2017, 09:27 PM.
      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

      go with the flow the river knows . . .

      Frank

      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by seer View Post
        So says the sock puppet who has no control over what he thinks or says...
        Stop misrepresenting 'determinism' and answer the question: "How can YOU exercise libertarian free-will in a vacuum without being influenced by the antecedent events of your entire life that comprise your subconscious?"
        “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
          Stop misrepresenting 'determinism' and answer the question: "How can YOU exercise libertarian free-will in a vacuum without being influenced by the antecedent events of your entire life that comprise your subconscious?"
          Sock puppet, how am I misrepresenting anything when you have agreed that every you think do or say is determined by antecedent conditions?
          Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

          Comment


          • Originally posted by seer View Post
            Sock puppet, how am I misrepresenting anything when you have agreed that every you think do or say is determined by antecedent conditions?
            We are not passive victims of fate, as you typically continue to dishonestly assert, despite having had determinism explained to you ad nauseam. Every decision is influenced by the antecedent conditions which comprise our subconscious mind. So please explain how you can exercise free-will in a vacuum? This is logically incoherent. You clearly refuse to address this problem because you don't have an answer other than "god made a miracle" and gave you libertarian free-will.
            “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
              We are not passive victims of fate, as you typically continue to dishonestly assert, despite having had determinism explained to you ad nauseam. Every decision is influenced by the antecedent conditions which comprise our subconscious mind. So please explain how you can exercise free-will in a vacuum? This is logically incoherent. You clearly refuse to address this problem because you don't have an answer other than "god made a miracle" and gave you libertarian free-will.
              Tass, "Influence" does not prohibit free will. Influence isn't exactly deterministic and I think that unless ones choices are actually determined by, not just influenced by, the antecedent conditions which comprise the subconscious mind, then it doesn't really make sense to call it determinism.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                Tass, "Influence" does not prohibit free will. Influence isn't exactly deterministic and I think that unless ones choices are actually determined by, not just influenced by, the antecedent conditions which comprise the subconscious mind, then it doesn't really make sense to call it determinism.
                I would have worded it as influenced and limited by 'determinism.' I gave a more comprehensive description of 'determinism,' that indeed 'determinism' may include possible choices depending on how on defines 'determinism.' I believe Tassman is correct in describing the problem from the human perspective of determining or claiming one's decision making process as 'free will.'

                Actually in one way or another even various theological Christian views are deterministic. God in most views determines future events and decisions in the future regardless of what people believe concerning the 'free will' nature of their decisions.
                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                Frank

                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                  Tass, "Influence" does not prohibit free will. Influence isn't exactly deterministic and I think that unless ones choices are actually determined by, not just influenced by, the antecedent conditions which comprise the subconscious mind, then it doesn't really make sense to call it determinism.
                  “Influence" does prohibit free will in that one is not aware of the influences arising from one’s subconscious mind. Hence, our decisions are not as “free” as they seem to be. But we make our choices nevertheless (under the illusion of 'free-will') and they form an integral part of the causal stream that is ‘determinism’.
                  “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                    “Influence" does prohibit free will in that one is not aware of the influences arising from one’s subconscious mind.Hence, our decisions are not as “free” as they seem to be. But we make our choices nevertheless (under the illusion of 'free-will') and they form an integral part of the causal stream that is ‘determinism’.
                    Okay, I see what you're saying, I just think "influence" is a confusing term to use, as if there is something, or someone else that is being influenced, and if only that someone else were aware of the influence then they could choose to ignore it. I know you don't mean that, so when you say nevertheless, we make our choices, what you really mean to say is that, though it is we that do the choosing, every choice we make is pre-destined from day one. In other words the "we" that you speak of is naught but a robot that becomes conscious of its pre-determined choices, after making them.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                      Okay, I see what you're saying, I just think "influence" is a confusing term to use, as if there is something, or someone else that is being influenced, and if only that someone else were aware of the influence then they could choose to ignore it. I know you don't mean that, so when you say nevertheless, we make our choices, what you really mean to say is that, though it is we that do the choosing, every choice we make is pre-destined from day one. In other words the "we" that you speak of is naught but a robot that becomes conscious of its pre-determined choices, after making them.
                      That's about it I guess. If we have free will, where and how in the evolutionary tree did it develop? Combatabilists such as Dan Dennett would argue that there's a a limited amount of genuine free-will, wiggle room as he sometimes refers to it, and I'm sympathetic to that view, although I'm not sure that I can agree with it.
                      “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                        If we have free will, where and how in the evolutionary tree did it develop?
                        How is that even relevant? Where and how in the evolutionary tree did self-awareness develop?
                        Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by seer View Post
                          How is that even relevant? Where and how in the evolutionary tree did self-awareness develop?
                          Like all evolutionary traits in species it was a gradual process. Other than humans primates and higher mammals such as whales, and elephants show lesser degrees of Self-awareness. Many primates recognize themselves in the mirror, and mourn the loose of their family members. Many mammals also dream.
                          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                          go with the flow the river knows . . .

                          Frank

                          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                            Like all evolutionary traits in species it was a gradual process. Other than humans primates and higher mammals such as whales, and elephants show lesser degrees of Self-awareness. Many primates recognize themselves in the mirror, and mourn the loose of their family members. Many mammals also dream.
                            So what? That does not tell us how or why self awareness came about - it certainly is not necessary for survival.
                            Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by seer View Post
                              So what? That does not tell us how or why self awareness came about - it certainly is not necessary for survival.
                              Of course, it does not tell us why? that is a philosophical/theological question, but it does give a natural evolutionary how self-awareness came about. Yes, it is necessary for survival.
                              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                              go with the flow the river knows . . .

                              Frank

                              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                                Of course, it does not tell us why? that is a philosophical/theological question, but it does give a natural evolutionary how self-awareness came about. Yes, it is necessary for survival.
                                First, no it it doesn't tell us how the evolutionary process caused self-awareness, you are just assuming that it did. Second, it is not necessary for survival, the vast majority of creatures, even most primates, survive just find without it.
                                Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
                                160 responses
                                508 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Started by seer, 02-15-2024, 11:24 AM
                                88 responses
                                354 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by Diogenes, 01-22-2024, 07:37 PM
                                21 responses
                                133 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X