Free will.

[shunyadragon]

I think that may depend upon how you are defining "free will" Tass. I mean, we of course are not able to choose the impossible, we can't choose to fly for instance, but are we free to choose amongst the possible options?

Breaking things like Laws of Gravity are not an issue. This sounds like Seer's sarcastic foolishness. I define free will as the ability to make contrary choices, and what other definition is there?
Yes, when we flap our arms we cannot fly.

Compatabilism considers humans have the ability to make limited contrary choices in a deterministic world. The evidence is we actually do this.

Do we limit our options, or are our options limited?

Our options are limited by many things, such as genetics, social and cultural conditioning.

[seer]

Compatabilism considers humans have the ability to make contrary choices in a limited deterministic world. The evidence is we actually do this.

Not really, listen to this debate. Neither Dennett or Harris believe we have the power of contrary choice. There are choices and options, but in every instance, we are determined to choose one over the other.

https://www.samharris.org/podcast/it...will-revisited

[JimL]

Breaking things like Laws of Gravity are not an issue.

Right, so lets ignore that as an issue altogether. The options available to us are limited, but that doesn't limit our will to choose among the available options in any particular situation.

This sounds like Seer's sarcastic foolishness. I define free will as the ability to make contrary choices, and what other definition is there?

Exactly, and if you agree that we have that ability, then you believe that we have free will.

Yes, when we flap our arms we cannot fly.

Yes, if only dreams were the reality eh.

Compatabilism considers humans have the ability to make limited contrary choices in a deterministic world. The evidence is we actually do this.
Our options are limited by many things, such as genetics, social and cultural conditioning.

I understand that our choices are influenced by our pasts, the causal chain if you will, but if the will is free to do otherwise, then the will itself is free whether there is underlying influence or not. It could do, it is free to do, otherwise! Yes?

[shunyadragon]

Not really, listen to this debate. Neither Dennett or Harris believe we have the power of contrary choice. There are choices and options, but in every instance, we are determined to choose one over the other.

https://www.samharris.org/podcast/it...will-revisited

I read over the pod caste and it does not say what you claim. DO NOT argue by web link. Cite specifically where Dennett claims this in Dennett's words.

What you described is Sam Harris's view in your own words.

[seer]

I read over the pod caste and it does not say what you claim. DO NOT argue by web link. Cite specifically where Dennett claims this in Dennett's words.

What you described is Sam Harris's view in your own words.

You can read Dennett's paper here:

I Could Not Have Done Otherwise-So What?

https://www.pdcnet.org/pdc/bvdb.nsf/...0010_0553_0565

It is open to friends of the CDO (Could Do Otherwise) principle to attempt to provide other grounds for allegiance to the principle, but since at this time I see nothing supporting that allegiance but the habit of allegiance itself, I am constrained to conclude that the principle should be dismissed as nothing better than a long-lived philosophical illusion. I may be wrong to conclude this, of course, but under the circumstances I cannot do .otherwise

[shunyadragon]

You can read Dennett's paper here:

I Could Not Have Done Otherwise-So What?

https://www.pdcnet.org/pdc/bvdb.nsf/...0010_0553_0565

incomplete! As usual you selectively cherry pick everything to suit your own agenda.

Source: http://community.bowdoin.edu/news/2014/05/dennett-on-free-will-and-moral-responsibility/

He argued that within biological boundaries there is always room for choice

© Copyright Original Source

Selective citing of Dennett, as usual, does not justify your objections.





More follows

[seer]

incomplete! As usual you selectively cherry pick everything to suit your own agenda.

Source: http://community.bowdoin.edu/news/2014/05/dennett-on-free-will-and-moral-responsibility/

He argued that within biological boundaries there is always room for choice

© Copyright Original Source

Selective citing of Dennett, as usual, does not justify your objections.

More follows

It was not selective quoting Shuny, I linked the entire paper, and the entire paper attacks the "Could Do Otherwise" premise. He actually calls it an illusion. Now he may believe we have some range of freedom but it is not based on the ability to do otherwise.

[shunyadragon]

It was not selective quoting Shuny, I linked the entire paper, and the entire paper attacks the "Could Do Otherwise" premise. He actually calls it an illusion. Now he may believe we have some range of freedom but it is not based on the ability to do otherwise.

It was selective quoting of Dennett, and it was easy to cite Dennett contrary as I did

[Tassman]

I think that may depend upon how you are defining "free will" Tass. I mean, we of course are not able to choose the impossible, we can't choose to fly for instance, but are we free to choose amongst the possible options?

Within narrow limits, according to Dennett.

Do we limit our options, or are our options limited?

[shunyadragon]

This reflects a better understanding of Dennett's philosophy, whether one agrees with it or not.

I believe there are many interlinked causal chain of events in the causal stream of determinism involved with this feed-back system. Among these involve genetic, and social and cultural causal influences. Most people do not acknowledge the desire for a 'Sense of Belonging' and other social survival strategies that influence our choices.

I do believe in the concept of 'potential free will,' which Dennett only indirectly addresses.

[seer]

It was selective quoting of Dennett, and it was easy to cite Dennett contrary as I did

Shuny, it was not selective I linked the paper which was in a Philosophical Journal. Dennett does believe in some form of freedom, but not in the ability to do otherwise - period. That the "Could Do Otherwise" principle is in fact an illusion. I mean the title of the paper was I Could Not Have Done Otherwise-So What? So if you define free will as the ability to make contrary choices, which you did above, then you are at odds with Dennett. And no where did you quote Dennett supporting the "Could Do Otherwise" principle.

[shunyadragon]

Shuny, it was not selective I linked the paper which was in a Philosophical Journal. Dennett does believe in some form of freedom, but not in the ability to do otherwise - period. That the "Could Do Otherwise" principle is in fact an illusion. I mean the title of the paper was I Could Not Have Done Otherwise-So What? So if you define free will as the ability to make contrary choices, which you did above, then you are at odds with Dennett. And no where did you quote Dennett supporting the "Could Do Otherwise" principle.

Again, again and again . . .

Your selective citation is the usual self justification of your biased agenda,

incomplete! As usual you selectively cherry pick everything to suit your own agenda.

Source: Source: [url

http://community.bowdoin.edu/news/2014/05/dennett-on-free-will-and-moral-responsibility/][/url]Dennett said. He argued that within biological boundaries there is always room for choice

© Copyright Original Source

[seer]

Again, again and again . . .

Your selective citation is the usual self justification of your biased agenda,

incomplete! As usual you selectively cherry pick everything to suit your own agenda.

Source: Source: [url

http://community.bowdoin.edu/news/2014/05/dennett-on-free-will-and-moral-responsibility/][/url]Dennett said. He argued that within biological boundaries there is always room for choice

© Copyright Original Source

Shuny, is this going over your head? I agree that Dennett believes that there is room for freedom, but he does not believe that we "Could Do Otherwise" and you, yourself, defined free will as the ability to do otherwise. So the free will in Dennett's Compatibilism does not agree with your definition of free will. And it not selective quoting when I linked the whole paper for all to read, so stop falsely accusing me. Dennett does not believe we have the ability to do otherwise - period.

[shunyadragon]

Shuny, is this going over your head? I agree that Dennett believes that there is room for freedom, but he does not believe that we "Could Do Otherwise" and you, yourself, defined free will as the ability to do otherwise. So the free will in Dennett's Compatibilism does not agree with your definition of free will. And it not selective quoting when I linked the whole paper for all to read, so stop falsely accusing me. Dennett does not believe we have the ability to do otherwise - period.

Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
Again, again and again . . .

Your selective citation is the usual self justification of your biased agenda,

incomplete! As usual you selectively cherry pick everything to suit your own agenda.

Source: url [url

http://community.bowdoin.edu/news/2014/05/dennett-on-free-will-and-moral-responsibility/][/url]

© Copyright Original Source

[seer]

Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
Again, again and again . . .

Your selective citation is the usual self justification of your biased agenda,

incomplete! As usual you selectively cherry pick everything to suit your own agenda.

Source: url [url

http://community.bowdoin.edu/news/2014/05/dennett-on-free-will-and-moral-responsibility/][/url]

© Copyright Original Source

Shuny, what is wrong with you? My only point is that Dennett does not agree with your definition of free will - the ability to do otherwise. I link the the paper where he clearly refutes the ability to make contrary choices. And this is what you always do - when you are proven wrong you accuse others of misrepresenting the argument. And I did not deny that Dennett believes we have freedom, but he does not believe that we do or can make contrary choices. And any one is free to read the entire paper here:

I Could Not Have Done Otherwise-So What?

https://www.pdcnet.org/pdc/bvdb.nsf/...0010_0553_0565

It is open to friends of the CDO (Could Do Otherwise) principle to attempt to provide other grounds for allegiance to the principle, but since at this time I see nothing supporting that allegiance but the habit of allegiance itself, I am constrained to conclude that the principle should be dismissed as nothing better than a long-lived philosophical illusion. I may be wrong to conclude this, of course, but under the circumstances I cannot do otherwise.