View Single Post
  #14  
Old 08-06-2019, 10:16 AM
Exapno Mapcase is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 31,656
The free will/determined arguments I read here all stumble when they approach any semblance of a true scientific proof. They fail to define the terms and the consequences of the differences adequately. They fail to demonstrate experiments that would distinguish between the two. They do, unfortunately, start at the end with their conclusion and work backward to create an explanation.

We don't even have an understanding of quantum mechanics and how the collapse of the wave function happens. If such a matter of pure mathematics that controls the way the universe works can't yet be addressed then any argument that depends on outside cause and effect has a massive hole at its core.

In the same way, Libet's experiments that have brain activity starting before a "conscious" movement is also flawed, because we do not yet have an understanding of what consciousness is.

This is not a problem for atheists more than for those, I presume majority of, non-fundamentalist believers who don't merely wave away any rational thought with "goddidit." There is no way to act as if there is not free will. No one can make any action, including a lack of action, without willing it to be so. The clockwork universe was disproved a century ago; why it has been resurrected for this special case is a mystery to me.

I am not saying that "free will," whatever that is, must exist. I'm contending that the arguments are so flawed that they are currently meaningless. That the OP had to specifically exclude compatabilism is proof. The answers to many "either/or" questions turn out to be "both." We don't know if it is. All we can say for sure is that the argument was poisoned at the beginning.