Hard determinism and free will are two ideas but they are ideas about how reality works. Hard determinism and free will are not mental states the way happiness and sadness are mental states. — Truth Seeker

I still think determinism is your psychology. If you see all the events and your actions from your past point of view, then everything seems to be determined.

But if one sees every event and one's actions from the present point of view, then everything is from freewill. It is that difference i.e. difference of point of view.

You can say a bottle is half empty or half full with wine. It just is upto your point of view and expression.

If you really believe the world events and your actions are under hard determinism, then you must be able to prove via the Logical Argument for that.

All you have is just your belief and assertions that the world events and your actions are under hard determinism and constraints just because you have been born, you have your mum's DNA, you taught yourself English ... etc. They are your past experiences, abilities and limitations. They are not the determinants and constraints. They can be, just because you are looking at them as the constraints.

You say that everything is determined and is under constraints. Some others say the opposite, and they believe in freewill.

They cannot be proved either true or false, because they are just personal opinions or psychological beliefs. Just like Descartes "I think therefore I am" is a psychological utterance with missing object for the "think".

You cannot prove psychological state or utterance using Logic. Logic needs something to check for the truth or falsity of the statements against something which are objective and infallible. Psychological beliefs and utterances have nothing to compare, check over or infer against for truth or falsity. Because all psychological states and beliefs are private to their owners.

That's just you saying this. It doesn't entail that you've looked for, or understand what we're putting infront of you.

If every event has a prior cause, these are absolute facts. It is not possible to sit yourself outside of that lineage. If you reject that, you're in need of a rather strong and convincing argument that includes empirical considerations and logical cogency. I don't think you ahve either. — AmadeusD

I used to have a lot of illusory beliefs such as people will live forever, because they resurrect as soon as they die after seeing the action films stars in the other films after seeing them dead in another film.

I also used to believe Santa was real, and the old folks born old, and I will stay as a wee 10 year old forever. But as time went by, all my illusions were proven to be wrong. People die for good, and the old folks were the babies and kids at one time a long time ago. They just got old by living on, and we all get old, and will die.

I am not sure what other illusions I still have. Not many, if not at all.

Happiness and sadness are mental states but they are determined by the electrochemical activities of the brain. You can't be both happy and sad at the same time but you can be happy at one time and sad at another time. — Truth Seeker

It makes perfect sense to me, when I ask someone "Are you happy?", and get a reply "Well Yes and No".

It goes even deeper than that. Assuming that atoms, molecules, cells, bodies, planets, universes are real and not simulation or hallucination or dream or illusion, our thinking occurs as a result of the electrochemical activities of the brain. This activity is determined and constrained by the laws of physics. That's why we can't think faster than our nerve conduction velocity which is 50 to 60 metres per second. — Truth Seeker

Well prove your argument in Logical argument. You must start with some reasonable premises for your arguments, and then inferences and reasonings for the premises, and then your conclusion. Will have a look at it together for its validity and soundness.

Just saying, everything is under hard determinism because blah blah blah .... doesn't have compelling points for its meaningfulness or truth as such. Many will just say, well that's just your belief and assertion, but what about the opposite point of view on that? And that has been happening all along in this thread. We can come to a closure clarifying either your assertion has a validity with logical sound argument, or it was just your mental state.

This isn't relevant at all to whether your current position on Free Will is (in this case, ignorance, but at base...) an illusion.

We hold that it is (though, intuitively, I am fairly open to the idea that something about consciousness to be discovered will shake this). If all events have prior causes, you don't have Free Will. You've not addressed any arguments at all.

We can come to a closure clarifying either your assertion has a validity with logical sound argument, or it was just your mental state. — Corvus

That's actually been done, several times. IFF all events have prior causes, Determinism is true.

There you go. Beat it, logically, if that's your game.

We hold that it is (though, intuitively, I am fairly open to the idea that something about consciousness to be discovered will shake this). If all events have prior causes, you don't have Free Will. You've not addressed any arguments at all. — AmadeusD

I thought my argument was clear in my reply to you. All my actions and expressions are caused by my freewill. What else could it be?

IFF all events have prior causes, Determinism is true. — AmadeusD

I have not seen the logical proof of that. Where is it? Or you could prove again here.
How do you know all events have prior causes?

Even if we suppose all events have prior causes, that doesn't entail determinism. Because some of the events are caused by freewill.

But you must prove how all events have prior causes first, and prove that they are absolutely not caused by freewill to secure the validity of determinism.

Is determinism true? — Truth Seeker

"Determinism" is a thought-experiment, not a truth-claim – a supposition, not a proposition.

How can we know for sure?

We cannot "know" it, only imagine it.

I thought my argument was clear in my reply to you. All my actions and expressions are caused by my freewill. What else could it be? — Corvus

Oh, I would say your argument was fairly clear, but it was weak. There are many many, many ways for you to be deluded, or wrong. More than there are ways you to be right. That, alone, is a good reason your argument isn't. at least 'good enough', if not a bad one. It could be determined by prior causes, which are determined by prior causes, which are determined by prior causes. Either, you end up with a logical regress - whcih you either need to solve, or make peace with.

I have not seen the logical proof of that. Where is it? Or you could prove again here.
How do you know all events have prior causes? — Corvus

You asked for a logically sound argument.

P1. IfDeterminism is true, Free Will is not possible;
P2. Determinism is true.
P3. Your choices are determined.
C. Your concept of Free Will is an illusion.

As noted, I'm not too heavily married to this, beyond have no evidence otherwise currently. I assume (in some part of my mind) that we will find empirical evidence to defeat the above. But, the above is logically sound.
It seems that your argument against determinism is just that you like the feeling of Free Will and would prefer it was not an illusion.

"Determinism" is a thought-experiment, not a truth-claim. — 180 Proof

Interesting. Even moreso in that this smacks of many of our number here on TPF.

(unrelated)An interesting article from a few years back with bold claims.

Determinism does not necessarily exclude "free will"; rather it can be conceptualized as conditioning – enabling-constraining – free actions re: compatibilism..

You asked for a logically sound argument.

P1. IfDeterminism is true, Free Will is not possible;
P2. Determinism is true.
P3. Your choices are determined.
C. Your concept of Free Will is an illusion. — AmadeusD

That is just saying determinism is true, and freewill is false.
That is nothing new to your psychological assertion, and you listed down as some sort of logical argument, which clearly is not.

Write down exactly back to front determinism replaced with freewill, you get the same conclusion for freewill is true and determinism is an illusion.

Sorry mate, go and think harder, and you need to brining in something which makes sense for your argument.

I will give you a hint. You must write down all the determinant properties for X, if X is determined. And prove those properties are necessarily true. If you do that, I will show you why they are false.

I agree.

No, the significant life experiences I listed actually happened. That's why I was able to compare the before and after states. Don't worry about saying sorry. We are all doomed to suffer and die.

I would love to know more about your experience of meditation. I meditate daily. I have not experienced what you described. How did you come to experience it?

I have seen the evidence for the following groups of variables: genes, environments, nutrients, and experiences. I have not seen any evidence for the existence of other groups of variables. If you can show me the evidence for other groups of variables, please do.

You have not managed to forever refrain from the 27 things I asked you to refrain from. Also, you have not managed to do the 7 things I asked you to do. I think this proves my point that you don't have free will. Your will is determined and constrained. I have given you the opportunity to prove me wrong but you have failed. It's not your fault. We are all prisoners of causality.

The strings of thoughts you shared in your post are not free from determinism. Our thoughts occur as a result of electrochemical activities in the brain. If your thoughts are so free, why don't you think of a trillion thoughts per second? Because your thoughts are not free. The nerve conduction velocity is 50 to 60 metres per second. If we could think freely, it would be whatever speed we want per second.

We don't have enough knowledge to predict people's behaviour with 100% accuracy but that does not mean that the behaviours are not deterministic. The same is true for predicting earthquakes.

It's a matter of evidence. I have provided you with the evidence. You failed to forever refrain from the 27 things I asked you to refrain from. You failed to do the 7 tasks I asked you to do.

I disagree with you because the evidence contradicts your position. It does not matter to me whether you agree with me or not.

How can you be both happy and not happy at the same time? I have never experienced. I wish we were all telepathic - that way we could really know what it is like to be each other instead of having to resort to communicate with words.

I have already provided you with evidence. I have invited you to refute my position but you have failed to do so.

I agree.

It's a matter of evidence. I have provided you with the evidence. You failed to forever refrain from the 27 things I asked you to refrain from. You failed to do the 7 tasks I asked you to do. — Truth Seeker

Hmmmm matter of evidence? Are you sure? :)
All I could see is your mental state for believing and claiming everything is under determinism. There is no philosophical argument in your claims at all. Your to-do tasks has nothing to do with either determinism or freewill. They are just functions of a biological agent.

I disagree with you because the evidence contradicts your position. It does not matter to me whether you agree with me or not. — Truth Seeker

It is OK that you disagree with me. I told you already that it is usually impossible to change someone's belief which is based on psychology or mental state. It is a psychological belief, so there is no way to persuade the believer using logical argument. I know it already, because I saw how it was impossible to change the view of the dualists who believe that I think therefore I am, is a logical statement.

How can you be both happy and not happy at the same time? I have never experienced. I wish we were all telepathic - that way we could really know what it is like to be each other instead of having to resort to communicate with words. — Truth Seeker

Human linguistic semantics are to capture and reflect your mental state and the world. You often hear people saying "I am not sure on that." "Yes and No", "maybe" "perhaps" ... you may not know it because maybe you have not done any self introspection for yourself, but an emotional state of someone can be mixture of various feelings.

I don't know what it is like to be you or anyone else. I have never been happy and unhappy at the same time.

I provided you with the determining effects of genes, environments, nutrients, and experiences. If you don't remember what I said, please read my posts again. Once you have refrained from the 27 things I asked you to refrain from and have done the 7 tasks I asked you to do, I will be convinced that you have free will.

I don't know what it is like to be you or anyone else. I have never been happy and unhappy at the same time. — Truth Seeker

It is natural that you cannot be anyone else than yourself. Maybe you have never been both happy and unhappy at the same time, but there are many others who have been. So it doesn't mean that one cannot be happy and unhappy at the same time.

I provided you with the determining effects of genes, environments, nutrients, and experiences. If you don't remember what I said, please read my posts again. Once you have refrained from the 27 things I asked you to refrain from and have done the 7 tasks I asked you to do, I will be convinced that you have free will. — Truth Seeker

Your 27 lists to-do are not meaningful in philosophical discussions. They belong to the functions of biological agents. They will not help you or me or anyone else to understand what freewill and determinism means.

If you want to know about freewill and determinism in philosophical point of view, you must try to prove determinism is valid supplying all the qualities and determinant properties of things or events which you believe to be determined.

I am going to ask you a simple question to start. : What do things and events which you believe to be determined have as their qualities and properties? i.e. what do you mean by something is determined?

It sounds like a contradiction to me. It's saying someone was alive and dead at the same time or angry and calm at the same time or excited and bored at the same time.

It sounds like a contradiction to me. It's saying someone was alive and dead at the same time or angry and calm at the same time or excited and bored at the same time. — Truth Seeker

You seem to be getting more confused. Being alive and dead at the same time is your description of a physical bodily condition. Your being happy and unhappy at the same time is your mental state. They are not the same category. You cannot draw comparisons between the two totally different categories.

I am not a professional philosopher. I am not even a student of philosophy. For me, science is the way to truth. That's why I conduct experiments to discover truths. Perhaps this forum is not the place I should be at. For me, the arbiter of truth is evidence.

An earthquake is determined by all the variables that cause it. A cyclone is determined by all the variables that cause it. A choice is determined by all the variables that cause it. Do you understand now?

I have seen brain scans of people who were suffering from depressive episodes. I have seen brain scans of people who were suffering from manic episodes. They are significantly different. I have never seen a brain scan of someone who was both happy and unhappy at the same time. Can you prove to me that you are both happy and unhappy at the same time?

An earthquake is determined by all the variables that cause it. A cyclone is determined by all the variables that cause it. A choice is determined by all the variables that cause it. Do you understand now? — Truth Seeker

Hmmm it just sounds like all tautologies to me. There is nothing new or compellingly significant in that statement.

Can you prove to me that you are both happy and unhappy at the same time? — Truth Seeker

Well, yes and no, perhaps or maybe? :wink:

I am not trying to give you anything new. Determinism is not a new idea. I have told you how you can prove to me that you have free will but you have consistently failed to do so. I don't have anything else to say.

I have no idea what that means!