4 ms·

The problem with this is that it infinitely regresses. If I can't control anything I do, then what's the difference if I'm empathetic and compassionate or not?

The problem with this is that it infinitely regresses. If I can't control anything I do, then what's the difference if I'm empathetic and compassionate or not? Surely I'm just "riding the wave" either way. These admonitions always start by saying we have no free will and then advising a course of action based on that knowledge, but that's incoherent.

plutonorm 4y ago
Is it? You can have no free will, but still be influenced by the words that come out of my mouth. Maybe in the process your life has less suffering in it. I don't know, I am experiencing a sensation that implies that I hope it does.
- dionidium 4y ago
  Right, but without free will you didn't choose those words and I have no choice how I react to them. It's all just playing out the way a plinko ball finds a route to the bottom.
  - plutonorm 4y ago
    so? that is the way it is.
nkjnlknlk 4y ago
I'd suggest reading: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freewill/#FreeWillMoraResp https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freewill/#FreeWillMoraRes... and jumping from there if you're interested. There is a difference if you're empathetic or not. That's easily observable in reality. What you're arguing against is perhaps the moral attribution to a decision if you have no control? That is, of course, irrelevant to the discussion being had.
- dionidium 4y ago
  The point is that this whole conversation is irrelevant and terms like "moral attribution" are non-sensical if there's no free will. Sam Harris does this same thing. He'll spend 45 minutes in a podcast explaining why it's unlikely that you have free will and then say, "but it's still important for you to act morally." Huh? That makes no sense. If I literally can't do anything except that I'm doing, then in no sense is it coherent to advise me to "act ethically." You're just saying what the causal chain made you say and I'm responding to it however the causal chain demands I respond. That is, you're saying it because you can't not say it and I'm responding like this because I also can't do otherwise. But intellectually the game is up. You can't tell the plinko ball to "act ethically" on its way down. It's just gonna go whichever way the physics play out based on the state of the world when you let go of the ball.

plutonorm 4y ago

Is it? You can have no free will, but still be influenced by the words that come out of my mouth. Maybe in the process your life has less suffering in it. I don't know, I am experiencing a sensation that implies that I hope it does.

dionidium 4y ago
Right, but without free will you didn't choose those words and I have no choice how I react to them. It's all just playing out the way a plinko ball finds a route to the bottom.
- plutonorm 4y ago
  so? that is the way it is.

nkjnlknlk 4y ago

I'd suggest reading: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freewill/#FreeWillMoraResp https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freewill/#FreeWillMoraRes... and jumping from there if you're interested. There is a difference if you're empathetic or not. That's easily observable in reality. What you're arguing against is perhaps the moral attribution to a decision if you have no control? That is, of course, irrelevant to the discussion being had.

dionidium 4y ago
The point is that this whole conversation is irrelevant and terms like "moral attribution" are non-sensical if there's no free will. Sam Harris does this same thing. He'll spend 45 minutes in a podcast explaining why it's unlikely that you have free will and then say, "but it's still important for you to act morally." Huh? That makes no sense. If I literally can't do anything except that I'm doing, then in no sense is it coherent to advise me to "act ethically." You're just saying what the causal chain made you say and I'm responding to it however the causal chain demands I respond. That is, you're saying it because you can't not say it and I'm responding like this because I also can't do otherwise. But intellectually the game is up. You can't tell the plinko ball to "act ethically" on its way down. It's just gonna go whichever way the physics play out based on the state of the world when you let go of the ball.