The problem is that that particular brand of metaphysics cannot make sense of the particular experience of freedom of choice. — Tobias
Yes, that is the problem, isn't it? What are you going to believe, your own experience of thinking, acting, and living, which demonstrates the reality of free will, or some half baked notion that the world is "naturalistically determined"? — Metaphysician Undercover
The problem is that that particular brand of metaphysics cannot make sense of the particular experience of freedom of choice. Saying it is an illusion will not help because an illusion tends to disappear when it is punctured. The experience of choice and freedom is irreducible to illusion though. In philosophy the phrase is that the first person is irreducible to the third person perspective. At least that is the take I have on free will. For me it is part of a bigger problem / human condition but those ideas I will hold to myself for now. — Tobias
Yes and that you are forced to draw that conclusion shows how implausible your definition of freedom is. — Tobias
Every political and social philosopher I have read on the subject considers freedom as freedom from something, but also as freedom to reach the goals you have set for yourself. The traffic light example by the way is Charles Taylor's. Those goals are much easier to reach in a society with well planned roads than in societies one just has to fin out everything by oneself. — Tobias
. Why would it lead to virtue ethics? — Tobias
That we must act is what is certain... So it seems the thing to do is to build the capacity to act well. Hence virtue ethics. — Banno
What I think you arrive at though is not that teh definition of freedom is contextual, the actual assessment of who is free and who is not is contextual, determined by the facts of the case. — Tobias
↪Banno This is not out of line with the notion of the sovereignty of the individual, though; if this sovereignty is considered as belonging to all individuals, in which case the bounding condition on one's sovereignty would be the performative contradiction involved in one's own sovereignty restricting the sovereignty of others. — Janus
Hmm. The article is an invitation to notice, in contrast, that society is overwhelmingly about cooperation. — Banno
The difference is between a picture of society as you against everyone else, or a picture of society as collective growth. — Banno
So, choosing to follow the rules of deontology or consequentialism does not tell us what to do in a particular case; we must also interpret the circumstances of that case and choose how to implement the rule.
All this to say that acting morally is not an algorithmic process, it is not just doing what the rule says. — Banno
Since all acting contains an element of virtuosity, and because virtuosity is the excellence we ascribe to the performing arts, politics has often been defined as an art. This, of course, is not a definition but a metaphor, and the metaphor becomes completely false if one falls into the common error of regarding the state or government as a work of art, as a kind of collective masterpiece.
So if we want to be free it's precisely sovereignty we must give up? — Frankly
This is new, and I appreciate that you may have a natural aversion to this idea, because this has not been in your readings, particularly because it is (or may be) my own original idea. — god must be atheist
We do internalize some social ethics, and reject some others. In every culture, if I may assert. And every culture may have different moral codes. But the basic evolutionary step was to make individuals accept that they have to conform to some ethical behaviour that society attempts to make them to accept. — god must be atheist
Thus, it is not some sort of moral ethical decision tree or moral ethical algorithm — god must be atheist
No. You misunderstand. You don't have to give up sovereignty. You can be free and sovereign at the same time. — Schootz1
you are a simple naysayer, without enough depth or insight — god must be atheist
This is a friendly and polite notification — god must be atheist
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.