So how have you come to the conclusion you have, without any contributory evidence? — Isaac
A model which does not predict individual events, but instead predicts the aggregate outcome of many events in a statistical manner, is not a determinist model. Period. Now you can say that it does not preclude some deeper, unknown deterministic outcome pathways, but that's like saying that unicorns may exist, but they are invisible to us.Inability to predict is not lack of determinism. It's lack of sufficient modelling accuracy. — Isaac
Lack of determinism would need to propose a randomising mechanism.
I don’t have that presupposition. I don’t know if they’re deterministic or not. I know they’re either deterministic or random. And you define freedom so that it’s not either. — khaled
That cannot be reconciled with the idea that our decisions are wholly determined by physical processes — Janus
So I accept that the two paradigms are correct in their own contexts, and make no demand that the irreconcilable be reconciled. — Janus
To me the most obvious thing is that we are free and morally responsible. That cannot be reconciled with the idea that our decisions are wholly determined by physical processes regardless of whether those physical processes are themselves deterministic or random. — Janus
Yes, if 'physical' means 'non-mental', as is often conceived including by Khaled. — Olivier5
But if one considers the mind itself as a cause, as a force in the world, then I think it follows that mental events ought to be regarded as 'physical'. They must have some materiality. The mind maters. — Olivier5
Something about minds being described as forces makes people cringe for some reason. — khaled
So all this talk about determinism, free will and physical processes - how does that have an impact on Free speech at campuses?
Yes, if 'physical' means 'non-mental', as is often conceived including by Khaled. But if one considers the mind itself as a cause, as a force in the world, then I think it follows that mental events ought to be regarded as 'physical'. They must have some materiality. The mind maters. — Olivier5
In the meantime, you'd agree with me that many other people think of their mind as a kind of captain of their body. Hence they assume minds have causal force. — Olivier5
Yes, I'm allowing that the intelligence which makes decisions may not be determined by any antecedent processes. Obviously that cannot be proven just as it's denial cannot. — Janus
To me the most obvious thing is that we are free and morally responsible. — Janus
Yes, I haven't been arguing that the mind is non-physical in any substantive sense — Janus
So all this talk about determinism, free will and physical processes - how does that have an impact on Free speech at campuses? — Ansiktsburk
Some claim that free will precludes a speaker being held responsible for listeners' actions. — creativesoul
Okay but then, there is no contradiction between your two paradigms. The mind is just one of many things that matter, and it is free to the exact extent that it is self-determined. — Olivier5
That's true, but some things such as human behavior are understood in terms of reasons and other things such as physical processes are understood in terms of mechanical causes. I am saying the two paradigmatic ways of explanation are incompatible not contradictory. — Janus
Like the sophists of old, some believe words can harm the human body, and if they rid the world of the words their pain will end. — NOS4A2
Yeah the guy who shot McKinley, wasnt he at a meeting with some hotshot anarchist celeb before shooting the Hawaii stealer? — Ansiktsburk
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.