Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by oneinfinity on June 3, 2011 at 3:47pm

Furthermore, even though the criminal had no freewill as to whether or not they committed  the crime, isn't it also true by this logic that the laws established by society also resulted from lack of freewill and thus we can't do anything but punish the criminal?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on June 3, 2011 at 4:06pm

He didn't say anything about punishing people for actions beyond their control.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by oneinfinity on June 3, 2011 at 4:24pm

Doctor Reality said, "But if there is no free will it would mean we need to look at criminal behavior differently"

 

Doug Reardon said, "Does it matter whether a criminal chooses to commit crime, or is impelled to commit crime?  It is the crime that society cannot accept, in either case, the source must be removed from society."

 

Nathan Palo said, "I don't see how punishing people for actions beyond their control makes any sense."

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on June 3, 2011 at 4:27pm

If you notice the alignment of the indent arrows, I was responding to Nathan, not you.  'He' was in reference to Doug.  Just thought I should clear that up.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by oneinfinity on June 3, 2011 at 5:22pm

oops! sry :D

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nathan Palo on June 3, 2011 at 5:39pm

It isn't as if we would be punishing them, because it wouldn't be us doing the punishment, it would be the nature of the universe punishing him.

 

Total lack of freewill removes any sense from motivation or morality, because we are no longer making choices, we are just along for the ride.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on June 3, 2011 at 8:14pm

It isn't as if we would be punishing them, because it wouldn't be us doing the punishment, it would be the nature of the universe punishing him.

 

We are part of the universe (and its nature).  Even if you consider the universe as one giant machine, and we are cogs in that machine, we still serve a function as cogs.  To say it is the nature of the universe that is punishing a person is incredibly vague and compared to identifying the specific component in the nature of the universe that is doing the punishing: us.

 

"Total lack of freewill removes any sense from motivation or morality, because we are no longer making choices, we are just along for the ride."

 

It shouldn't.  With or without freewill, experiences still have intrinsic value to us.  Pain, pleasure, thought, consideration, love, hatred, fear, security, compassion -- these things all exist, and they all affect/ effect motivation and morality.  Even in a universe devoid of freewill which functions like a machine, all of the afore mentioned things are components in that machine.  They all have properties and impact in processes that actually do occur.  Choice is a process that does occur with or without freewill.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nathan Palo on June 5, 2011 at 3:38pm

We would be punishing them in the same way the cell door does, if even that.

 

For any action to occur, there must be a decision, otherwise it is just a process beyond any control.

 

Punishment is an action, so it is one of us deciding to carry out the punishment, or it is 'the universe' or some other force doing it, and we are part of the means of punishment. Or, there is no punishment taking place.

 

Yes, with or without freewill, experiences have value.  But if you aren't influencing your experience, then there is no reason to attempt one action rather than another. Not that you could even attempt  anything without freewill of some degree.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on June 5, 2011 at 6:23pm

"We would be punishing them in the same way the cell door does, if even that."

 

No, not at all.  Cell doors and human beings may both be composed of matter, be subject to the same laws physics, subject to causality, and may share a host of base similarities, but at the macro level, they are two vastly different things with vastly different behaviors and responses.

 

"For any action to occur, there must be a decision, otherwise it is just a process beyond any control."

 

For most actions to occur, no decision is necessary; however, the term 'punishment' is generally reserved for something deliberate.  In the case of punishment, a decision is necessary.  Decisions occur all the time.  They are a pretty well-observed phenomenon.  I've already explained this earlier in the thread here.

 

"Or, there is no punishment taking place."

 

An unlikely scenario.  Punishment is a well-observed phenomenon.

 

"...or it is 'the universe' or some other force doing it, and we are part of the means of punishment."

 

I don't think it is at all meaningful to say that the universe is doing it, and I've never seen any evidence for some 'other force'.

 

"...so it is one of us deciding to carry out the punishment..."

 

This is, by far, the most plausible and well-supported explanation.  The processes involved, at a basic level, can be very easily outlined and explained.  Sentient beings are integral to these processes.

 

"But if you aren't influencing your experience, then there is no reason to attempt one action rather than another. 

Not that you could even attempt  anything without freewill of some degree."

 

Reasons to attempt one action rather than another (more simply, motivations) do exist.  We all experience this numerous times though out the course of even a single day.

Permalink Reply by Nathan Palo on June 5, 2011 at 7:52pm

This is a reply to Kris,  it seems we have run out of space to reply under one comment.

 

A choice means that there are more than one way for the chooser to act. Determinism and choice are mutually exclusive.

 

Cell doors and humans are quite different, but doors don't control their actions, and without freewill, neither do we.

 

I agree, what we think of as punishment is a well-observed phenomenon. But if it isn't actually deliberate, then we have been seeing something that looks a lot like punishment, but isn't actually punishment.

 

I don't think the universe punishes anyone (except in that we are part of the universe, so you could phrase it that way if you wanted), and I don't think any other force does it. So either we have a choice, meaning it is possible for us not to punish them, meaning we have freewill,  or there is no decision, and therefore no punishment.

 

And I suppose reasons to try and act a certain way can still exist without freewill, but they are entirely irrelevant and useless because you would not be able to act upon them.

 

If you were certain that you had no freewill, and you acted on that certainty, you would no longer believe you should try and influence your life. If you did in fact have freewill, and you acted this way, the consequences could be quite bad for you.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on June 9, 2011 at 11:48pm

"A choice means that there are more than one way for the chooser to act. Determinism and choice are mutually exclusive."

 

Choice means making selection.  Unless you are Shrödinger's you cannot act more than one way.  With or without free will, and with or without causality, by definition you will act the way you will act and will not act the way you will not act.  It's completely senseless to define choice as the ability to act the way you will act and act the way you will not act at the same time. Doing so means removing the term by which we call a real process that does occur.  The process of choice certainly does occur; we simply previously misunderstood it's basic nature.

 

"And I suppose reasons to try and act a certain way can still exist without freewill, but they are entirely irrelevant and useless because you would not be able to act upon them."

 

Of course we can act on them. We do this all the time. The way we act on them is simply causal in nature.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Nathan Palo on June 10, 2011 at 3:10am

Choice must be between multiple possible outcomes, by definition.

 

And yes, you will do the thing you will do. But that doesn't mean that what you will do tomorrow is determined today. Are there multiple ways that the future can unfold? You have definitely not proved that there aren't. If there are multiple possible futures, can I influence which one actually happens? You have not proven that I can't. You have the burden of proof, I do not, as I have not claimed that we actually do have freewill.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• Next ›
• Page