Comments on: Why belief in free will is important: its pro-social and moral implications http://the-mouse-trap.com/2009/12/16/why-belief-in-free-will-is-important-its-pro-social-and-moral-implications/ Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:55:23 +0000 hourly 1 By: XiXiDu http://the-mouse-trap.com/2009/12/16/why-belief-in-free-will-is-important-its-pro-social-and-moral-implications/#comment-766 XiXiDu Sun, 20 Dec 2009 09:17:44 +0000 http://the-mouse-trap.com/?p=494#comment-766 Here is a discussion on Free Will: http://friendfeed.com/chrisharris/bc52676e/having-to-resist-writing-blog-post-about-free Also includes the question why to add free to the perception of volition. Here is a discussion on Free Will: http://friendfeed.com/chrisharris/bc52676e/having-to-resist-writing-blog-post-about-free

Also includes the question why to add free to the perception of volition.

]]> By: A. Granville Fonda http://the-mouse-trap.com/2009/12/16/why-belief-in-free-will-is-important-its-pro-social-and-moral-implications/#comment-765 A. Granville Fonda Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:06:37 +0000 http://the-mouse-trap.com/?p=494#comment-765 Michael says that to present determinism as the "opposite" of free will is “a bit misleading.” . Quite an understatement! Kant resolved this seeming paradox only by declaring a dualistic exception to determinism. Schopenhauer called it “the world knot,” and J. S. Mill said that it is “insoluble.” Rather than resort to dualism, indeed “probably the most popularly held position among philosophers on the topic is what's called compatibalism: the view that we have free will *and* determinism is true.” But I do not find the arguments to that effect very weighty. Mostly they just *say* that both views must be true and they leave it at that. That’s no argument at all. I have a new one to offer, however. Over 50 years ago it seemed immediately obvious to me, when as a young engineer I thought of this problem, that if you *are* that deterministic system, then whenever what it does includes the feeling of intent, that is you acting of your own free will. It *is* mechanistic, and it *is* clockwork, but that is what the process is, and it’s *your* process. It is *you.* Own it! You are not “possessed” by the causative factors within you; quite to the contrary, *you possess them.* You do what you will, but at the same time you will what you must. This is in detail how it is that, as Michael says, we have free will and yet determinism is true. What unfolds within us breaks no laws of physics, but obeys them, as does everything else, with not necessarily any quantum exception. Allowing for that, all clockwork. No exceptionalism at all, so no recourse to dualism. *Free will is determinism as seen from within.* There never really was any paradox — Kant, Schopenhauer, Mill, and many others to the contrary. All that ever was required to resolve it was a simple attitude adjustment. Compatibilism is not new — but in 50 years, including extensive recent study (thanks to the internet) I have never encountered this explication of it. Have you? Comments, please. Michael says that to present determinism as the “opposite” of free will is “a bit misleading.” . Quite an understatement! Kant resolved this seeming paradox only by declaring a dualistic exception to determinism. Schopenhauer called it “the world knot,” and J. S. Mill said that it is “insoluble.”
Rather than resort to dualism, indeed “probably the most popularly held position among philosophers on the topic is what’s called compatibalism: the view that we have free will *and* determinism is true.” But I do not find the arguments to that effect very weighty. Mostly they just *say* that both views must be true and they leave it at that. That’s no argument at all.
I have a new one to offer, however. Over 50 years ago it seemed immediately obvious to me, when as a young engineer I thought of this problem, that if you *are* that deterministic system, then whenever what it does includes the feeling of intent, that is you acting of your own free will. It *is* mechanistic, and it *is* clockwork, but that is what the process is, and it’s *your* process. It is *you.* Own it! You are not “possessed” by the causative factors within you; quite to the contrary, *you possess them.* You do what you will, but at the same time you will what you must.
This is in detail how it is that, as Michael says, we have free will and yet determinism is true. What unfolds within us breaks no laws of physics, but obeys them, as does everything else, with not necessarily any quantum exception. Allowing for that, all clockwork. No exceptionalism at all, so no recourse to dualism. *Free will is determinism as seen from within.* There never really was any paradox — Kant, Schopenhauer, Mill, and many others to the contrary. All that ever was required to resolve it was a simple attitude adjustment.
Compatibilism is not new — but in 50 years, including extensive recent study (thanks to the internet) I have never encountered this explication of it. Have you?
Comments, please.

]]> By: Michael http://the-mouse-trap.com/2009/12/16/why-belief-in-free-will-is-important-its-pro-social-and-moral-implications/#comment-758 Michael Thu, 17 Dec 2009 05:16:53 +0000 http://the-mouse-trap.com/?p=494#comment-758 It is a bit misleading to present determinism as the "opposite" of free will. Probably the most popularly held position among philosophers on the topic is what's called compatibalism: the view that we have free will *and* determinism is true. The view that we need determinism to be false in order to have free will is called "libertarianism" and is not widely held. It is a bit misleading to present determinism as the “opposite” of free will.

Probably the most popularly held position among philosophers on the topic is what’s called compatibalism: the view that we have free will *and* determinism is true.

The view that we need determinism to be false in order to have free will is called “libertarianism” and is not widely held.

]]> By: Wednesday Round Up #94 « Neuroanthropology http://the-mouse-trap.com/2009/12/16/why-belief-in-free-will-is-important-its-pro-social-and-moral-implications/#comment-751 Wednesday Round Up #94 « Neuroanthropology Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:12:59 +0000 http://the-mouse-trap.com/?p=494#comment-751 [...] Gautam, Why Belief in Free Will Is Important: Its Pro-social and Moral Implications If we, Westerners that is, believe in determinism, then we are more likely to behave [...] [...] Gautam, Why Belief in Free Will Is Important: Its Pro-social and Moral Implications If we, Westerners that is, believe in determinism, then we are more likely to behave [...]

]]> By: uberVU - social comments http://the-mouse-trap.com/2009/12/16/why-belief-in-free-will-is-important-its-pro-social-and-moral-implications/#comment-749 uberVU - social comments Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:13:41 +0000 http://the-mouse-trap.com/?p=494#comment-749 <strong>Social comments and analytics for this post...</strong> This post was mentioned on Twitter by sandygautam: New Mouse Trap post Why belief in free will is important: its pro-social and moral implications http://goo.gl/fb/2Sfu... Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by sandygautam: New Mouse Trap post Why belief in free will is important: its pro-social and moral implications http://goo.gl/fb/2Sfu…

]]>