block universe — Pathogen
What would a definition of free entail? — Pathogen
made several points in that last post in no particular order, to which one specifically are you referring? I would be glad to explain my position more clearly — Pathogen
I would argue that randomness is not necessarily incompatible with free will but determinism always is. — Pathogen
I don't understand this statement, would you mind clarifying it for me? — Pathogen
how free will may be objectively possible — Pathogen
The very structure of that world - imposed on it by our minds - precludes freedom. — Echarmion
a different, but equally valid, way to structure reality. — Echarmion
...it would need to be determined what freedom is, in what manner or fashion it is real, in order to establish the equal validity for what it does.
I’m not sure that can be done. — Mww
Did you intend this for me? — Mww
‘Totally connected’ doesn’t take into account the structure of these connections in consciousness. While they appear “to be everywhere in no time”, as you say, these events are nevertheless interacting with experience according to some form of structure: value/significance. — Possibility
It is disconcerting, though, that the pre-made occasions of eternalism's experience would be even worse that presentism determining events as it went along. — PoeticUniverse
How do you mean ‘worse’? — Possibility
Seems like there's more hope to intervene in the actions of the 'now' production rather to the same that was carved in stone — PoeticUniverse
The fact that we cannot arrange the universe like a single orderly sequence of times does not mean that nothing changes. It means that changes are not arranged in a single orderly succession: the temporal structure of the world is more complex than a simple single linear succession of instants. This does not mean that it is non-existent or illusory.
“The distinction between past, present and future is not an illusion. It is the temporal structure of the world. But the temporal structure of the world is not that of presentism. The temporal relations between events are more complex than we previously thought, but they do not cease to exist on account of this....
...We do not have a grammar adapted to say that an event ‘has been’ in relation to me but ‘is’ in relation to you....
The fundamental theory of the world must be constructed in this way; it does not need a time variable: it needs to tell us only how the things that we see in the world vary with respect to each other. That is to say, what the relations may be between these variables. — Carlo Rovelli, ‘The Order of Time’
But the temporal structure of the world is not that of presentism. — Carlo Rovelli, ‘The Order of Time’
...We do not have a grammar adapted to say that an event ‘has been’ in relation to me but ‘is’ in relation to you.... — Carlo Rovelli, ‘The Order of Time’
what the relations may be between these variables — Carlo Rovelli, ‘The Order of Time’
The important part is that randomness only occurs at the observation. That randomness undermines the fully deterministic worldview. — Pathogen
snide — Pathogen
It is disconcerting, though, that the pre-made occasions of eternalism's experience would be even worse that presentism determining events as it went along. — PoeticUniverse
So, then, in the new free will attempt, fundamental consciousness traverses already existent world-lines of events previously carved, although this doesn't seem so 'free'. I am failing… — PoeticUniverse
thinking in terms of temporality — Janus
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.