“Human freedom and responsibility” is looking at just a small segment of “the choice” that permeates all biological evolution, beginning with the prokaryotes, at least, if not some ways before.
Change “freedom of choice” and “free will” to just “the ability to make choices from the options available to one in the environment”. And see that as existing at various levels of reach throughout the biological tree.
Cause and effect... If it is free will driving the cause, free ability to choose then the final output is logically a product of free will and, therefore, determinism loses ground here, as the only things predetermined is the result of someone's actions (of which one has no idea until it happens). A particular action can cause multiple results, so what is predetermined then? These are pure, unfounded speculations. If determinism takes cause and effect(s) as a basis, then fatalists can counter-argue asking what is the source of each particular cause in the chain of events? Isn't it predetermined, inconceivable god's will that appears a driving force of all?
Macro-determinism can never be proven or dis-proven. Suppose determinism was true. What evidence would show this? How would we know? The same goes for indeterminism. So it is better to suspend judgement and accept that we are free to make decisions in an autonomous way because this is exactly how we experience ourselves in the world, assuming we are not insane. And why hold an unprovable metaphysical assumption if it contradicts our own experience?
It is not contradictory to our experiences though. If anything the concept of free will is contradictory as it implies behaviors arising from nowhere making it an uncaused caused. Our experience doesn’t line up with that since our behavior isn’t random. On the other hand our experience does tell us that we have internal drives that cause our behavior and external causes that limit our behavior and freedom occurs when the causes for action stem internally. Freedom is self determination.
@@younes7671 I think Kant was right to cordon off causality from human freedom, because it reflects what we experience. The only people who experience themselves as lacking free will are people who are mentally ill. When we make a decision we don't experience our body determining it, we could have gone a number of different ways. Once we make a decision and the body follows through then it is a done deal. We have internal drives and they "nudge" us but don't determine us. Ideas in the mind don't have causal force, but they can influence us.
@@earthjustice01 Well Kant in my view was naive to cordon off causality from human freedom since that didn’t really solve the problem just set it aside. If we are to be consistent in understanding causality there is no reason it doesn’t apply to the mind. Especially if it’s constituted by the brain. Now I understand that our experiences may feel like we are freely choosing but this is not to be confused with free will because again it’s an inconsistent concept. Instead we must understand the self that is choosing as an embodiment of the causalities that make up who we are and that is always determining our choices. Again an internal determination is embodied and can be experienced as choosing ‘freely’ in ordinary terms but in reality it’s simply the alignment of our internal determining causes such as our desires and the possibility to pursue them out in the world. This scenario doesn’t make you any less determined but does make you more free and I do think this it is an accurate way to explain our experience. Had there been no determinism how would we explain how we choose one thing over another at a given period of time? There must have been a determining cause that even gave you the possibility to choose one thing over the another no? You may say yea but I could have chose otherwise as evidence by making a different choice at a different time but again since each moment isn’t identical the determining causes can change making the outcome different.
@@spazthespasticcolonel1054 People sometimes suffer the delusion that they are being controlled by external forces: eg aliens, the government, or mythical beings.
Great audio, thanks. Halfway thru and the distinction between fatalism and determinism is made clearer for me.
On the contrary. There is an overlap causing confusion and uncertainty.
Thanks for this!
“Human freedom and responsibility” is looking at just a small segment of “the choice” that permeates all biological evolution, beginning with the prokaryotes, at least, if not some ways before.
Change “freedom of choice” and “free will” to just “the ability to make choices from the options available to one in the environment”. And see that as existing at various levels of reach throughout the biological tree.
Cause and effect... If it is free will driving the cause, free ability to choose then the final output is logically a product of free will and, therefore, determinism loses ground here, as the only things predetermined is the result of someone's actions (of which one has no idea until it happens). A particular action can cause multiple results, so what is predetermined then? These are pure, unfounded speculations. If determinism takes cause and effect(s) as a basis, then fatalists can counter-argue asking what is the source of each particular cause in the chain of events? Isn't it predetermined, inconceivable god's will that appears a driving force of all?
Macro-determinism can never be proven or dis-proven. Suppose determinism was true. What evidence would show this? How would we know? The same goes for indeterminism. So it is better to suspend judgement and accept that we are free to make decisions in an autonomous way because this is exactly how we experience ourselves in the world, assuming we are not insane. And why hold an unprovable metaphysical assumption if it contradicts our own experience?
It is not contradictory to our experiences though. If anything the concept of free will is contradictory as it implies behaviors arising from nowhere making it an uncaused caused. Our experience doesn’t line up with that since our behavior isn’t random. On the other hand our experience does tell us that we have internal drives that cause our behavior and external causes that limit our behavior and freedom occurs when the causes for action stem internally. Freedom is self determination.
@@younes7671 I think Kant was right to cordon off causality from human freedom, because it reflects what we experience. The only people who experience themselves as lacking free will are people who are mentally ill. When we make a decision we don't experience our body determining it, we could have gone a number of different ways. Once we make a decision and the body follows through then it is a done deal. We have internal drives and they "nudge" us but don't determine us. Ideas in the mind don't have causal force, but they can influence us.
@@earthjustice01 Well Kant in my view was naive to cordon off causality from human freedom since that didn’t really solve the problem just set it aside. If we are to be consistent in understanding causality there is no reason it doesn’t apply to the mind. Especially if it’s constituted by the brain. Now I understand that our experiences may feel like we are freely choosing but this is not to be confused with free will because again it’s an inconsistent concept. Instead we must understand the self that is choosing as an embodiment of the causalities that make up who we are and that is always determining our choices. Again an internal determination is embodied and can be experienced as choosing ‘freely’ in ordinary terms but in reality it’s simply the alignment of our internal determining causes such as our desires and the possibility to pursue them out in the world. This scenario doesn’t make you any less determined but does make you more free and I do think this it is an accurate way to explain our experience. Had there been no determinism how would we explain how we choose one thing over another at a given period of time? There must have been a determining cause that even gave you the possibility to choose one thing over the another no? You may say yea but I could have chose otherwise as evidence by making a different choice at a different time but again since each moment isn’t identical the determining causes can change making the outcome different.
@@earthjustice01Do please choose to tell us more about mental illness.
@@spazthespasticcolonel1054 People sometimes suffer the delusion that they are being controlled by external forces: eg aliens, the government, or mythical beings.