4 ms·

In the absence of free will, expressing yourself in a decision is simply a function taking the current environment and your past as input. You may be a unique

In the absence of free will, expressing yourself in a decision is simply a function taking the current environment and your past as input. You may be a unique being, due to your past, meaning that the possibility for another being to make the same "choices" in the same sequence as you is really low, however that's just high entropy. Compatibilism is basically word play. If the universe is deterministic, then we are just a bunch of atoms reacting predictably to external forces, making us not very different from rocks.

davemp 8y ago
> If the universe is deterministic, then we are just a bunch of atoms reacting predictably to external forces, making us not very different from rocks. No. This is very disingenuous. We are a beautifully ordered, continuously changing, unlikely set of atoms with history and the ability to affect / finely order huge amounts of other atoms. We're much better and more interesting than rocks! :) (No offense to anyone who really likes rocks--they're cool too).
- bad_user 8y ago
  I'm not talking about what's interesting or not in the universe. I'm saying that compatibilism basically says that rocks too have free will. Which makes the term meaningless. I mean, if you think about it, rocks too can suffer grinding due to their environment, having their shape, size or texture changed, which will affect what "choices" they'll make in the future and all rocks are unique in the universe due to their shape, composition and location. So in regards to a "free will" discussion, the only difference between us and rocks is what? That we are living organisms and thus can move around? So is an amoeba.
  - davemp 8y ago
    It's very frustrating to have discussions with deconstructionists. Rocks do not have cognition.
    - bad_user 8y ago
      I'm just messing with you :-P
  - coldtea 8y ago
    >So in regards to a "free will" discussion, the only difference between us and rocks is what? That we are living organisms and thus can move around? So is an amoeba. No, it's that we perceive our time-line-uniqueness as will (consciously) whereas rocks don't.

davemp 8y ago

> If the universe is deterministic, then we are just a bunch of atoms reacting predictably to external forces, making us not very different from rocks. No. This is very disingenuous. We are a beautifully ordered, continuously changing, unlikely set of atoms with history and the ability to affect / finely order huge amounts of other atoms. We're much better and more interesting than rocks! :) (No offense to anyone who really likes rocks--they're cool too).

bad_user 8y ago
I'm not talking about what's interesting or not in the universe. I'm saying that compatibilism basically says that rocks too have free will. Which makes the term meaningless. I mean, if you think about it, rocks too can suffer grinding due to their environment, having their shape, size or texture changed, which will affect what "choices" they'll make in the future and all rocks are unique in the universe due to their shape, composition and location. So in regards to a "free will" discussion, the only difference between us and rocks is what? That we are living organisms and thus can move around? So is an amoeba.
- davemp 8y ago
  It's very frustrating to have discussions with deconstructionists. Rocks do not have cognition.
  - bad_user 8y ago
    I'm just messing with you :-P
- coldtea 8y ago
  >So in regards to a "free will" discussion, the only difference between us and rocks is what? That we are living organisms and thus can move around? So is an amoeba. No, it's that we perceive our time-line-uniqueness as will (consciously) whereas rocks don't.