Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Unseen on June 17, 2012 at 1:36pm

Since once a quantum event happens, from then on determinism reigns, I don't understand how you think this salvages free will. Whether my actions are the result of an unbroken deterministic chain of events or whether a quantum occurrence or two entered in, how does that salvage free will? You seem to be saying that you'd have free will if a random atomic particle shattered a nitrogen atom. How does that happening make your action free? or does it simply set up a new deterministic chain?

To salvage free will, it seems to me, you need to believe in something like a soul or spirit or ghost that isn't bound by the laws, gross or subatomic, governing everything we know.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Major on June 17, 2012 at 2:30pm

What about consciousness? What is it? Is that the soul or spirit acting upon predetermined alternatives?

If you are saying the that the action we have decided upon before we are conscious of it is unavoidable, does that not mean we are completely unaccountable for our actions?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pope OoO (Out of Order) on June 17, 2012 at 2:36pm

does that not mean we are completely unaccountable for our actions?

Well, perhaps in the heat of the moment, or passion, but those circumstances are already considered in the process of justice, right?

Meanwhile, no, people are expected to be accountable for their actions, so at the very least, they usually have plenty of time to consider the consequences before acting.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Major on June 17, 2012 at 2:47pm

Hey you have to help me out here. I need to read up more. But I think what Unseen has said is that the deliberation between two or competing actions takes place before we are aware. Wouldn't that mean the weighing of consequences, or some similar process, takes places in the subconscious, it is predetermined? I may be missing something, but if our actions (including the illusion that we are weighing consequences) are just chemical reactions in our brain, how can we be accountable?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Unseen on June 17, 2012 at 2:55pm

I've come to accept that people will follow their nature. Bad people are judged according to what we believe to be bad, likewise with good people who are praised according to our concept of the good.

People do what is in their nature. We hold them accountable, if we do, according to our own nature, because we feel they are accountable and that feeling is NOT a matter of choice on our part. It has to do with who we are.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Major on June 17, 2012 at 4:12pm

So what you seem to be saying is that people are accountable for their actions in the sense they get judged (by people who have no choice but to judge, it is in their nature) but the action could not be prevented.

I think what you are saying is that a rock falling on a man's head and killing him is no more or no less accountable or responsible for the action than a man who shoots another man and kills him. Each acts according to physical laws, gravity in the former case, and brain chemistry in the latter?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Unseen on June 17, 2012 at 4:21pm

To try to prove free will by invoking the need for accountability is quite exactly the same, logically, as proving God exists because if he didn't the bad wouldn't be punished.

Why do you accept the logic of one and irrationally reject the logic of the other?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Major on June 17, 2012 at 5:10pm

Wait, I am keeping an open mind on the subject and trying to understand you. I am not necessarily rejecting anything but trying to learn something.

Going back to my example, why should the rock be treated any differently to the person. Both obeyed natural laws.

Please don't say because it is in our nature to hold the man accountable and not the rock.

Permalink Reply by archaeopteryx on June 17, 2012 at 5:02pm

John - don't neglect to account for all of those quantum fluctuations --

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Major on June 17, 2012 at 5:11pm

Arch I'm trying to get me head around what Unseen is saying. If you can help my friend, jump in. What am I missing?

Permalink Reply by archaeopteryx on June 17, 2012 at 6:11pm

John, frankly I don't think you're missing anything - Unseen, however, despite his touted degree in Philosophy - could well be missing a marble or two.

determinism |diˈtərməˌnizəm|
noun Philosophy
the doctrine that all events, including human action, are ultimately determined by causes external to the will. Some philosophers have taken determinism to imply that individual human beings have no free will and cannot be held morally responsible for their actions.

So on that basis, I'd have to say that your rock and your man are on equal footing, equally guilty or equally innocent - give or take a few quantum fluctuations, of course.

Permalink Reply by Unseen on June 17, 2012 at 3:04pm

Consciousness is what is called an epiphenomenon of a physical state of affairs.

An epiphenomenon is "a secondary effect or byproduct that arises from but does not causally influence a process."

Another familiar epiphenomenon would be a rainbow, an epiphenomenon of the of the refraction of light in water mist. A rainbow doesn't really exist in space, though it appears to.

If you want to call consciousness the soul, fine, but it doesn't control the body. If it does, what is the physical mechanism? You see, it's not a cause, it's an effect. It's passive.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 79
• 80
• 81
• 82
• 83
• …
• 87
• Next ›
• Page