4 ms·

free will and agency are two very different terms. Free will is a philosophically charged term that is often incoherent or ill defined, agency is fairly straigh

free will and agency are two very different terms. Free will is a philosophically charged term that is often incoherent or ill defined, agency is fairly straight forward, it's the capacity of any actor to realize their goals and act autonomously in their own interest. It's the ability to shape your surroundings rather than be shaped by them. There's plenty of agency in a deterministic universe, a dictator with a nuke has a lot more of it than a slave in a cage. There's no need to be nicer to criminals on grounds that the universe is deterministic, which it is. (both in Newtonian physics and quantum mechanics). The nice guy is as deterministic as the criminal. None of them are "forced to do" anything by their brain state, there is no subject that is puppeteered around by your brain like some reverse dualism, you and I are our brains (and bodies). What matters is if you want criminals to have more agency, and if you don't, you punish them.

criddell 2y ago
> What matters is if you want criminals to have more agency, and if you don’t, you punish them. In a deterministic universe, “want” doesn’t mean much. That you would decide to punish a criminal is the only thing that could happen.
- Barrin92 2y ago
  No, again this is the same fallacy. Wants, needs, desires and preferences mean exactly what they meant before you figured out that the universe is deterministic. The misconception is simply not understanding that these are conceptual properties of material agents, not metaphysical claims about causality. You wanted an ice cream five minutes ago, reading a book about determinism didn't change that want. We actually do want to punish criminals and therefore we should do it. Whether we all run on cellular automata at the bottom levels of physics is just completely irrelevant to discussing human interaction.
  - criddell 2y ago
    Okay, I see what you are saying. If I was a ball, I’d want to roll downhill. If I chose to roll uphill it might be like me choosing to not have the ice cream and then do anyway because I love ice cream.
cyclotron3k 2y ago
> the universe is deterministic, which it is. (both in Newtonian physics and quantum mechanics). Bold claim. Have there been some advancements in our understanding, that I'm not aware of?

criddell 2y ago

> What matters is if you want criminals to have more agency, and if you don’t, you punish them. In a deterministic universe, “want” doesn’t mean much. That you would decide to punish a criminal is the only thing that could happen.

Barrin92 2y ago
No, again this is the same fallacy. Wants, needs, desires and preferences mean exactly what they meant before you figured out that the universe is deterministic. The misconception is simply not understanding that these are conceptual properties of material agents, not metaphysical claims about causality. You wanted an ice cream five minutes ago, reading a book about determinism didn't change that want. We actually do want to punish criminals and therefore we should do it. Whether we all run on cellular automata at the bottom levels of physics is just completely irrelevant to discussing human interaction.
- criddell 2y ago
  Okay, I see what you are saying. If I was a ball, I’d want to roll downhill. If I chose to roll uphill it might be like me choosing to not have the ice cream and then do anyway because I love ice cream.

cyclotron3k 2y ago

> the universe is deterministic, which it is. (both in Newtonian physics and quantum mechanics). Bold claim. Have there been some advancements in our understanding, that I'm not aware of?