Sorry. I'm currently reading a book that gets into Small World math & physics. I didn't really expect you to grasp the concept of "short-cuts" without a long digression. But I liked the neatness of the concept, in the context of this thread. So I wrote it down.Compatibility does not require total chaotic indeterminism, but only a few short-cuts on the road to destiny. — Gnomon
I get the first half of the sentence. But the meaning of the second half is not at all clear to me. Your diagram in your "Small world model" doesn't help. — Ludwig V
As Daniel Dennett, in Freedom Evolves, concluded : "… although in the strict physical sense our actions might be determined, we can still be free in all the ways that matter, because of the abilities we evolved". The example I gave before is the Panama Canal, which was only an imaginary dream for over a century, until many people, motivated by that dream, devised ways to move mountains. That small-world social mind-meld (inter-communication of motivation) is one of the "abilities" that Dennett noted. I think it's a pretty good trade-off as a substitute for non-human impotence or super-natural magic. :wink:Are you suggesting that an imagined freedom is any substitute for the real thing? Seems like a very poor exchange to me. — Ludwig V
It's not the heavenly ideal, but a free-roaming mind is better than being a sentient mind trapped in an imprisoned body. N'cest pas? In a Matter-only world, "it is what it is" ; but in a Mind & Matter world, what is imagined might also become realized. As one writer put it : "I feel that as human beings with free will, the mind tends to limit itself from living to the fullest when we become prisoners of our own mind." Is your mind locked-in? :chin:In case, the freedom to "roam the world of ideas" is no substitute for the freedom to go home to you partner and kids. — Ludwig V
Perhaps, but the "cause" of willful action --- as contrasted with physical actions --- is presumed to be within the agent. That's why we call it "Will Power". Otherwise, the action would be pre-determined instead of free-will. :cool:3)the causes of voluntary behaviour are certain states, events, or conditions within the agent: acts of will or volitions, choices, decisions, desires etc... — The Chapter you cited entitled Compatibilism
So an action is free if its causes are inside the agent.If the causes of those causes are outside the agent, can we conclude that his acts of will, etc are not free? — Ludwig V
I have a lot of time for Dennett. But that doesn't mean I agree with everything that he says. This is just throwing in the towel. We all have limitations - things we cannot do. But doesn't really affect the issue.… although in the strict physical sense our actions might be determined, we can still be free in all the ways that matter, because of the abilities we evolved". — Gnomon
But I'm not a sentient mind trapped in an imprisoned body. I'm a person, as free as anyone is.It's not the heavenly ideal, but a free-roaming mind is better than being a sentient mind trapped in an imprisoned body. — Gnomon
I wouldn't know. I don't live in a mind-and-matter world, nor in a matter-only world, not, for that matter, in and ideas-only world. On Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, I'm a monist. On Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, I'm a uncountable pluralist. On Sundays, I don't do philosophy.In a Matter-only world, "it is what it is" ; but in a Mind & Matter world, what is imagined might also become realized. — Gnomon
Well, I suppose I can make some sort of sense of that. But not enough to add up to a philosophical position."I feel that as human beings with free will, the mind tends to limit itself from living to the fullest when we become prisoners of our own mind." Is your mind locked-in? :chin: — Gnomon
Either we are free all day and every day, or we are not free. It is entirely mundane, not special in any way. But perhaps you just want to change the subject.Creativity and Invention: Imagination often precedes innovation and creation. Many of the inventions and creations that shape our world start as ideas in someone's imagination. When these ideas are acted upon and brought into the physical world through effort, experimentation, and implementation, they can become a reality. This process involves turning abstract thoughts into tangible products, technologies, or works of art. — Gnomon
What is wilful action as contrasted with physical action? In what way is a cause "within" me any different from a cause "without" me? How can an internal cause not determine the action unless it is not a cause or it is in some way special? What reason is there to suppose that an internal cause is in any way special - apart from the fact that it is inside me? (We have opened people up and not found any special causes.)Perhaps, but the "cause" of willful action --- as contrasted with physical actions --- is presumed to be within the agent. Otherwise, the action would be pre-determined instead of free-will. :cool: — Gnomon
I wasn't crazy about writing it. :grin: I don't always know how to express myself in these matters. And sometimes it's not even my fault, As ssu just pointed out regarding the definitions of cause and reason.It's about whether or not I can actually choose one path or another.
— Patterner
That little word actually is interesting. What does it mean? Either I have a choice, or I do not. — Ludwig V
In any scenario, let's just take the cop, there are numerous things it is possible for a human to do.I'm just saying that you can't have no ability to choose any but one of multiple equally possible paths and have free will in the matter.
— Patterner
In one way, you are right. But there are some kinds of coercion that are compatible with the capacity to choose. Determinism eliminates the capacity to choose, and so eliminates the possibility of coercion.
When the cop arrests me and asks me to hold out my hands for the cuffs, do I have a choice? When I drag myself in to work on a Monday morning, do I go because I have chosen to go? When my opponent forces me to take his rook (castle) in order to get my queen, what choices do I have? When I pay my taxes, what choice do I have? Assume in all these cases that I have a normal capacity to choose. — Ludwig V
That's OK. As I said, I wrote that for me, just to express the aha! idea in words, as it occurred to me.I'm afraid I don't see that the Small Worlds model affects the issue at all. Sorry. — Ludwig V
Come on. It's a metaphor. You seem to have a problem with both Metaphors and Metaphysics. Do you remember how I define "meta-physics", not as religious doctrine, but as philosophical reasoning?But I'm not a sentient mind trapped in an imprisoned body. I'm a person, as free as anyone is. — Ludwig V
I'm getting the impression that you don't do philosophy. I'm not sure what you think this forum is all about, if not attempts to construct or destruct a "philosophical position". Do you have a "position" on the Freewill question, other than "I just don't get it"? Maybe everyday is Sunday for you. FWIW, my philosophical position is Both-FreeWill-and-Determinism Compatibilism .Well, I suppose I can make some sort of sense of that. But not enough to add up to a philosophical position. — Ludwig V
But this thread is about how free-effective-willful-mental (meta-physical) choices can Cause changes in the real world outside the imagining mind, despite the dominance of linear physical Determinism. Is that a "special", perhaps supernatural power for you. Or is it simply a normal "ability" of the human mind to reach-out and to exert influence on (affect) the non-self world? FreeWill : the ability to make choices that affect, not just the body, but other minds, and the physical world. Are you a "free person" in that sense, are you an Agent in the world, or just an object? Or do you want to change the OP subject : Freedom and Determinism?Either we are free all day and every day, or we are not free. It is entirely mundane, not special in any way. But perhaps you just want to change the subject. — Ludwig V
The June 2024 issue of Scientific American magazine has an article on how human babies learn that they can control material objects with their power of Agency : their WillPower. It's what the article calls "ability". The causal ability "within me" is different from physical causation, in that it would never happen in a million years without Purpose (goal setting) within me. Intellectual Purposes may be difficult to achieve, but not denied by Destiny, and not chosen by Determinism.What is wilful action as contrasted with physical action? In what way is a cause "within" me any different from a cause "without" me? — Ludwig V
The difficulty is to understand metaphors. If one takes them literally, they are usually false or meaningless. They can have a meaning, and even a truth, of their own.Come on. It's a metaphor. You seem to have a problem with both Metaphors and Metaphysics. Do you remember how I define "meta-physics", not as religious doctrine, but as philosophical reasoning? — Gnomon
It depends what you think doing philosophy is. Does Heidegger or Derrida do philosophy. Many people (including most analytic philosophers) think not? Did Wittgenstein or Ryle do philosophy? Many people (including many analytic philosophers) think not. That's how it works.I'm getting the impression that you don't do philosophy. I'm not sure what you think this forum is all about, if not attempts to construct or destruct a "philosophical position". — Gnomon
This changes everything. But let me ask whether you think that determinism is not a physical (empirical) question? I'll tell you now that I don't think it is. It is a way of thinking about the world and science. Whether it would count as metaphysical inquiry, I wouldn't know. But I certainly think it is a theoretical enquiry. Freedom (Free Will) is a way of thinking about certain parts (components - people) of the world. Understanding these two as ways of thinking, especially whether and how far they are compatible, not deciding between them, is (should be) the project.FreeWill is not a physical (empirical) question, it's a metaphysical (theoretical) inquiry. My compatibility position is ultimately a Monism : Causation comes in many forms. — Gnomon
Well, we can talk about that.My compatibility position is ultimately a Monism : Causation comes in many forms. — Gnomon
There are some specialized causal processes that seem to be crucial to our functioning. They are not often found outside living things, so we may be fairly close to each other.That internal Causation (willpower) is different from external Determinism (energy) in the sense that a meta-physical Mind is different from a physical Rock. — Gnomon
Determinism is a necessary assumption in order to do practical Science. But it may be optional to do theoretical Philosophy. In any case, Determinism is a metaphysical (philosophical) generalization, based on incomplete evidence.FreeWill is not a physical (empirical) question, it's a metaphysical (theoretical) inquiry. My compatibility position is ultimately a Monism : Causation comes in many forms. — Gnomon
This changes everything. But let me ask whether you think that determinism is not a physical (empirical) question? I'll tell you now that I don't think it is. It is a way of thinking about the world and science. . . .
Well, we can talk about that. — Ludwig V
We all have our idiosyncracies and few of us come up with the perfect phrase every time. I tend to be a bit cautious, if you like, and perhaps scrutinize the text more closely than I need to. The reason is that one of the ways I come to understand meaning is by asking what the opposite would be and what would make it apply. (See below). The dictionary definitions of cause and reason were a bit of a blow. The philosophical use of "cause" and hence of "reason" is, if you like, specialized.I wasn't crazy about writing it. :grin: I don't always know how to express myself in these matters. And sometimes it's not even my fault, As ssu just pointed out regarding the definitions of cause and reason. — Patterner
That start me wondering what it would mean if physical determinism only metaphorically prevented any other possibility. But I'm not arguing that we are not prevented from some choices in one way or another. The question is whether this is always the case or just sometimes and what the factors are that can prevent choices. See?I'm not "actually choosing" if physical determinism literally prevents any other possibility. — Patterner
The question is whether you have no possibility of choosing from the options. But determinism effectively says that you have no options, because an option is by definition something you could choose to take.If I'm aware of all the possibilities, but I have no possibility of "choosing" from the myriad options, and can do only the one that the physical factors determine, then awareness is only watching the show. — Patterner
I don't know what you mean.That start me wondering what it would mean if physical determinism only metaphorically prevented any other possibility. — Ludwig V
Certainly it is impossible to do anything and everything we can think of. I can't jump up and fly to the moon. I can't walk through the earth to find lost treasures or mine diamonds. And sure, coercion happens. But even if coercion prevents me from accomplishing a particular goal, it doesn't prevent me from taking all but one exact action.But I'm not arguing that we are not prevented from some choices in one way or another. The question is whether this is always the case or just sometimes and what the factors are that can prevent choices. See? — Ludwig V
Right. What are the words for this kinds of ideas? "Numerous things it is possible for a humsn to do in a given situation" is not the same as "choices" if, despite being actions that it is known humans can perform, determinism only allows one. But, to my knowledge, we don't have a word that expresses that, because our languages were developed by beings who thought we could have done other than we did.The question is whether you have no possibility of choosing from the options. But determinism effectively says that you have no options, because an option is by definition something you could choose to take. — Ludwig V
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.