View Single Post
Old 2013-01-06, 17:36   Link #53
ZGoten
Custom User Title
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Age: 34
Send a message via ICQ to ZGoten
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dhomochevsky View Post
On the part of determinism, you have to distinct between theoretical possibility to predict something and real science.
We did that on numerous occasions in this thread. I am aware of the differentiations you mentioned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asuras
You have two individuals; a man imprisoned in chains, and a man living at home. The man at home is free to eat his hamburger whenever he likes, while the chained man is force-fed a hamburger by his captors. One is an action of free will, while the other is not. Thus, free will is a question of whether or not the action was caused by a immediate psychological state. If the action was carried out due to the individual's own psychological desire/need then it is a free action. If it was not, then it was not free. This allows free will to be compatible with determinism in an unbending, linear universe.
That merely changes the definition of free will, though, does it not? You are basically saying that if something happens that is solely the result of immediate causes inside a person's body, with no outside influence at a given moment, then it can be considered free will according to Stace, right? I'm not sure, what to think of it. He is trying to fit free will and determinsim together, but in doing so deviates from what most people would consider free will, which kind of renders the whole attempt futile. Unless his only intention would be to not scare people of the reality determinsim would suggest, which many people find frightening.

Quote:
But how does apparent randomness (or rather, uncertainty in quantum physics) fail to support determinism? Just because something cannot be contained within a cause-effect scenario does not mean that the human (for example) chooses freely. If an individual's actions were based on the results of a coin I myself flipped, does that make them free even though its random?
I'm not sure whether or not you understood what I was saying in the opening post. Basically, if determinism were true, there would be no free will, obviously. The only way to prove determinism right would be through an entity that resembled Laplace's demon. Quantum physics however, among other schools, have already proven, that such an entity can never exist, thereby making it impossible for determinsim to be ever proven right, even though it may very well be.
__________________
Truth is elusive to those who refuse to see with both eyes.
ZGoten is offline   Reply With Quote