Thread: Free Will and Determinism

Soft determinist. I believe that although we were always fated to make a choice, it doesn't matter. We still chose to do it, using the human definition of choice.

So yes, you chose to make this thread, although you were always going to. Does that make sense?

Although I'm thinking about some other alternatives at the moment. Perhaps not to do with randomness in the quantum sense, but to do with the maximum complexity of logic... I'm about to make a thread on it, check it out.

Are you saying that behaviour is determined, but ones individuality has an effect?

Going Off topic I like the Blake qoute in your signature.

Originally Posted by psychology student

Did I choose to make this thread, or was it determined by forces internal and external?

You did choose to, but your choice was bound to happen. Even five billion years ago, everything was set in motion such that your making of this thread was absolutely going to happen. It is where things were headed, and there is no other way things could have happened. Considering past "mistakes" is only a brain's method of behaving differently in future situations. The perception that the past could have happened a different way is an illusion.

So then it is theoretically possible to predict everything that occurs, over all time, by tracing back to the supposed start of the universe "the big bang". Interesting!

Originally Posted by psychology student

So then it is theoretically possible to predict everything that occurs, over all time, by tracing back to the supposed start of the universe "the big bang". Interesting!

Except there are far, far, too many variables to make even a half-serious prediction.

Originally Posted by Omicron

Except there are far, far, too many variables to make even a half-serious prediction.

Yeah, its complicated to say the least, I did say theoretically. But computer processing power is growing exponentially, who knows in say 200 years.

Yes, as UM said, the universe now is how the universe was always going to be, otherwise it wouldn't be. The universe in the future will equally be the one single possible state of all things at that time. There is no flexibility; the future is completely rigid. If we chose to do something then the molecules in the big bang had the correct velocities that they'd go on to form thoughts in the form of activity of neurons that would lead us to make that choice. However, we still chose.

Then again, perhaps it is fallacious to describe the universe in this way. Perhaps simply by explaining which forces particles feel and what their masses are, you don't explain the universe at all.

Perhaps the universe sometimes becomes so complex that it transcends logic. The human brain is the most complicated object in the universe as far as we know.

So "free-will is an illusion". Lets look at the implications:

How can we blame and stigmatise people for commiting crime when it is not their fault? Their actions are determined. Is it logical that sentencing for crimes should not go beyond protecting the public? Should we abolish the whole doctrine of punishment/retribution for bad acts?

Disucss.

Well that doesn't conflict with my opinion. That's a large motivation behind forming my opinion, in fact, besides just thinking about it logically.

We may have always been going to chose to commit an act, but we still chose to do it using the human definition of choice. And we were always going to judge the commiter, for the safety of the public. But it doesn't matter.

We could chose to abolish the whole system due to such an argument. And if we did, there would be chaos. All determinism says is that either we were always going to chose to let chaos reign, or we were always going to chose to not let that happen. And it's obviously best for us to chose the latter.

What I'm trying to get across is that determinism really doesn't matter, we still make choices and hence have free will, and it is irrelevant that we were always going to make those choices.

Does that make sense?

Yeah I understand; a humanistic viewpoint.
I didn't imply that we should abolish the whole criminal system, but we should remove the concept of retribution against bad offenders; to propose to have a system where the motivation is solely to protect the public, by removing dangerous persons from society.

I never thought retribution should be a factor in justice anyway.

It should be entirely about protection, reformation, and deterrence.